Human Resources and Mental Heatlh
The previous weeks’ research has brought much light to the term human resource, at least to me. Overall the synopsis is: “faith in thing not seen” (Woock, 2007)- referring to human resources, of course. Although there are codes, rules and regulations- especially in the eyes of mental health, a lot of cross paths can impact in one case. Meaning; the rule to punish someone can be altered by their right to confidentiality, privileged information, and the complexities by which that state says one thing, the agency says another, and the “feds” have an overall decision- also different, of course. This is not to say that the particular levels of healthcare are in disagreement of their morals, but the way in which they are enforced can bring certain differences in compliance, systems and reporting. My research pointed out two types of HR systems: evidenced- based and results-based. As you may imagine, they operate on opposite sides of the spectrum however, aim for the same purpose. Barends and Rousseau (2011) propose that evidence- based is no different than a science, which is based on determining trends, but through the findings of factual research, or precedent. The results-based involves the “now” and as Diane Schilder (1997) suggests, involves a level of processes. These processes include: A) Process- the ability reflect upon the agencies mission, B) Goals- the ability to set a standard for which has been dictated by current trends in health care, C) Targets- the ability to set quantitative data to a desired result, and D) Mechanisms- the ability to implement such target through which has been recently discovered.(Schilder, 1997) Mental health specifically, has a difficult time in the human resource department. Low wages with high expectations has caused great turnover within the industry. This is especially true for non-profit, federally funded agencies looking to shave cost at every corner.
Where I currently work, this is partly the problem. Let me first give you an example: A co-worker of mine has been with the agency for 7 years. He works hard, has never been reprimanded for any wrong doing, works long hours, and picks up a lot of extra paperwork. 26 years old, it is only natural that this individual move on with his life, go to school, and engage in other opportunities. However; he also recently married and is expecting a child within the coming months. This individual is enrolled in engineering courses at the local university, but his work his still top-notch. 7 years full-time with all of this, and recently landed an internships to further develop his educational goals. The issue was, he didn’t know when the internship would start until he received the phone call, so was unable to give an adequate to week notice from full-time. However; he wasn’t, and isn’t leaving the agency; he is just going down to part time. At part time, there is a max for the allowed vacation hours one can accumulate. After putting in his notice to move part time, offered to keep a full case load, and would work whenever he could aside his internship. Not only did his superiors tell him no, but they are trying to fire him because he went part-time. However; this is not the story, we will call the individual Joe. Joe didn’t want to lose all those hours that would be taken away from the part-time max vacation time cap. Being there 7 years, he had 98 hours, but part-time only allows 75. This is the same for sick time, personal time, and holiday time. He called the HR manager and asked what he could do not to lose all those hours, which usually would be cashed out to an individual. The HR manager told him because he only gave one week notice (remember he wasn’t leaving, just going to part time) he could not get the earned hours, which took 7 years to gather such a vacation time package, and denied him $2800 he would of received from such benefits. They simply took the hours from him. The HR manager had the discretion to say otherwise, so what would I say to implement the aforementioned in order to avoid the aforementioned? I would say to HR; use the results-based system. Use a system that accounts for the regulations which do not work or are insulting to your staff. The place for which I work has now a simple evidenced-based practice which understands that turnover is high, so we will just replace people and deal with the consequences later. It is one of the most hated companies within the area and a lot of it has to do with the way employees are treated. I understand that governmentally funded agencies have financial discrepancies, but that is not excuse to be unappreciative of your employees.
This is a similar way by which I would have implemented it in this course. Engage in a plan, set goals for what you want to accomplish and if it doesn’t work, then changed the course of action. This is also good for everyone’s confidence and self-esteem. It is much easier to be proven wrong, than to be told no. Research will prove one way or the other, but its validity and reliability has a way with individuals accepting their faults- and then a team will regroup and learn to build off of each other.
Schilder, D. (1997). Overview of Results Based Accountability: Components of RBA. Harvard
Family Research Project. Retrieved from hfrp.org
Gibbons, J., Woock, C. (2007). Evidence-Based Human Resources. The Conference Board.
Research Report Retrieved from wpweb2.tepper.cmu.edu
Rousseau, D., Barends, E. (2011). Human Resource Management Journal. Becoming an evidence
Based HR practitioner. 21(3). 221-235
