Demand More From Your Staff, But Abandon Them In Tough Times

 

Anyone remember reading about this in the Toronto Star?

 

I've written periodically on how poorly we do when it comes to hiring/training/supporting practices across the board, but especially in politics, from the politicians on down through to their staff.  I've even suggested some ways we could do better.

 

Thing is, we know, from study after study, how harmful our current approach is to both our health and our economy.  The Feds have even developed a psychological health and safety standard to address the kinds of concerns that stem from the labour relations practices favoured by the likes of Tony Clement.  When there are succeeding, best-practice models to crib from, why on earth aren't we consciously choosing to do better?  If we truly believe people matter, precarious employment leads to presenteeism and the like, why aren't we investing in the people who shape our policy?

 

Why isn't government following its own advice?

 

As the voter/ultimate shareholder, it's up to us to look in the mirror for that answer.

 

In Tough Times, Abandon Your Employees

Bruce K. Co-author of Smart Customers, Stupid Companies. Helps companies be more humane.

Henry Blodget's excellent piece on short-term greed got me thinking about a very basic question: do companies owe their employees loyalty when the economy gets tough?

 

For some time, I've been appalled that major companies are simultaneously laying off employees and reporting record profits. The picture differs depending on where you live and work, but that's a fairly common trend.

 

Contrast, for example, CNNMoney's report at the beginning of this year, Hey Wall Street, Get Ready for More Layoffs with John Cassidy's July 16 story, which starts like this:

What do these large dollar numbers have in common: $6.5 billion, $5.5 billion, $4.2 billion, and $1.9 billion? They represent the latest quarterly net profits made by too-big-to-fail banks—in order, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, and Goldman Sachs.

Now imagine that your company has been growing quickly, and that the culture of the company is to expect employees to step up when challenges and opportunities emerge. If there is an important pitch coming up, you are expected to stay late or work over the weekend. If there is an important order to fill, you are expected to work until the order gets filled.

 

You work hard. You step up. You are a hard-working and loyal employee. You recruit your friends to come work at your company; you put your personal reputation on the line.

Then the economy hits a rough patch. The company lets you go; two months later, they announce record profits.

 

Is that the right way to do business?

 

I understand that companies are not charities, and that they can't exist forever paying out more in wages than they earn in revenues.

 

But it strikes me as horribly short-sighted for a company to simultaneously report record profits and fire loyal employees. But some will argue that companies are here to make money for their investors, and that such moves are entirely warranted.

 

That's why I'm calling on companies that employ this strategy to make it obvious. I suggest they band together under the banner, "Profits before People". In fact, to make this easier, I've created a few simple ads they could run to attract more investors.

 

I'm not trying to be cute or clever. If this is an intelligent and proper strategy, why shouldn't companies formally declare that they follow it?

 

Take a look at my crude examples, and create your own Profits before People art, then post links in the comments below.

 

On the other hand, if your company sticks by its employees in tough times, then PLEASE feel free to brag about that below.http://cce-wakata.blogspot.ca/2013/07/what-canadas-political-parties-can.html