Ep 5: Antisemitism, temperature and firing HR

This month's episode of the Personnel Today HR Podcast, brought to you by Deel, explores antisemitism in the workplace – how it differs to other forms of discrimination, and what employers can do to tackle it. With the recent hot weather, we also look at calls for the UK to introduce a maximum working temperature, and we reflect on a fintech CEO's decision to eliminate his HR team.

Every month, we focus on some of the most significant events of the previous weeks and delve into the implications for HR professionals.

Renowned author and business psychologist Professor Binna Kandola, co-founder of Pearn Kandola, joins the team to discuss the experiences of Jewish employees in the UK. How does this form of discrimination manifest itself in workplaces and how what should employers do to address it?

We look at a recommendation from the UK's Climate Change Committee on introducing a maximum workplace temperature and the best ways to cope with working during a heatwave.

And we look into comments made by the CEO of US fintech company Bolt about "getting rid of HR" because they "create problems that don't exist".

Presented by Rob Moss, Jo Faragher and Adam McCulloch
Produced and edited by Rob Moss
Music: Eternity Bro/Shutterstock

Transcript

SPEAKER_03 0:05

Hello and welcome to the Personnel Today HR podcast brought to you by Deal. Hire, manage and pay anyone anywhere. I'm Rob Moss, editor of Personnel Today, and I'm once again joined by our contributing editors Joe Farragger and Adam McCullough. Welcome both. Hello. And I'm delighted that we're also joined by Professor Binner Condola. Binner is a business psychologist and author and senior partner and co-founder of Pern Condola, a consultancy working in equality, diversity and inclusion. Welcome Binner. Well, thank you, Rob, it's great to be here. Each month we look at some of the most significant HR stories of the last few weeks and examine the implications for HR practitioners and employers. Coming up in this month's episode, we're going to be talking to Binner about the experiences of Jewish employees in the UK and the rise of anti-Semitic sentiment, exploring what employers can be doing to improve their psychological safety during periods of tension. And as part of the UK experience unprecedented heat warnings over the bank holiday weekend, we'll be examining the age-old topic of maximum working temperature. Should there be a limit and how would it work? We'll also be looking at the comments from the CEO of a US fintech company on how he got rid of his HR team because they created problems that didn't exist. But before that, a message from our friends at Deal, sponsors of the Personnel Today HR podcast. Deal's the all-in-one people platform for modern HR teams. Bring hiring, onboarding, payroll, performance, offboarding, and more into one global system. So you can focus on people, not paperwork. Serving over 150 countries, Deal simplifies compliance and helps HR teams move even faster. See what hiring without borders looks like. Visit DEEL.com slash personnel to book your demo. That's DEEL.com slash personnel.

Antisemitism

SPEAKER_03 2:34

Okay, let's kick off with you then Bina. Welcome. You've been looking into the experiences of Jewish employees. Tell me more.

SPEAKER_02 2:44

Yeah, this was uh a follow-up to research we carried out and published in December of 2023, looking at religious expression in the workforce. And I was sharing that research in one or two places, and there was one question that kept coming up, which is what does our research say about the events of the 7th of October 2023, when over 1200 Jews were killed when uh Hamas came across the border at that festival, and then the subsequent conflict that escalated from there. I have to say, our research tells us nothing about that because you know we collected the data a long time before. And I just worked on the assumption that somebody would look at the impact of that conflict in workplaces in the UK, but nobody did, so we did it. And in terms of the anti-Semitism part of the research or the experience of Jewish employees in the workplace, we had 500 people who participated in a survey, and then we had a focus group and interviews. And so it was actually uh looking at what what's happened since the 7th of October 2023, and I think the main finding for me was that for uh Jewish colleagues in the workplace since the 7th of October 2023, there have been an increase in anti-Semitism of 50%. So 50% of people said that there'd been an increase in anti-Semitism since then. Wow, okay. It's huge, yeah. Uh and um and the other interesting thing is actually not to so much to do with the research, but just the lack of interest. I know personnel today have always been interested in this, and this is why I'm very grateful again for you giving me the opportunity to talk about this topic and and and that you published an article recently on this. Um, but generally speaking, people just kind of quite silent on it. And the overall finding is that people don't talk about this in the workplace. Um, when the 7th of October happened and there was an increase in anti-Semitism, the Community Security Trust found that in their regular updates in terms of anti-Semitic incidents and attacks, it went through the roof. It was the highest level by a huge margin after the uh uh 7th of October, and that high level has been meant, kind of been maintained ever since it's dropped from then, but every now and then, because of the conflict in the Middle East, it goes up. And it doesn't have to be just about conflict in the Middle East. There was another spike in October of last year when um when worshippers at the Heaton Park synagogue were murdered, and there was another increase in anti-Semitic attacks, and we kind of treat these things as if they're in the external world and nothing to do with the workplace, and our research showed it's everything to do with the workplace. One of the main things that we found was that the Jews at work have actually become much more cautious about the way they express themselves in terms of their faith or their identity, uh, and that may be the in terms of the way they talk, but also the symbols that they show. If you wear a kippah, I'm not wearing that to work anymore. If if somebody wore a Star of David, they would hide it or they wouldn't wear it. And I've actually known, I've actually come across instances where people said when they were checking into places, like checking in for a conference at a hotel, they would actually deliberately misspell their name or give the wrong name so that the person wouldn't think that they're Jewish. So it goes out to these very practic minuti details. And and so this this concealment and caution has actually become part of the experience of uh Jews and Jewish colleagues in the workplace. And the one predominant theme from our research, remember, this was nearly two years ago, uh, was that when George Floyd was murdered, there was a huge outcry, not just in society but in workplaces too. And in workplaces, people in organisations, leaders in organizations, said reach out to your black colleagues, look after their well-being, find out how they are. And the vast majority of people I spoke to and in the survey said nothing like that happened when it came to them. Now they were they actually they said it was exactly the right thing. I never came across anybody who said that what happened in 2020 was wrong. Everybody said it was the right thing to do. It was just a comparison. If that happened then, then why isn't that happening now?

SPEAKER_03 7:05

Do you think that the nature of religious and race discrimination around Jewish people is different to other forms?

SPEAKER_02 7:16

Yeah, yeah, it's a great question. And yes, I I do believe that. If you look at uh we've got some more research coming out on religion, actually, but if you the um on if you look at like the six faiths that we've covered, and and we've covered Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism, as well as Judaism and Islam, the other four have stereotypes associated or the associated with them. They're a mix of well, actually they're pretty positive, the stereotypes associated with those groups, and kind of based on little knowledge, mind you. So we don't know much, but the but the most negative stereotypes are associated with Jews and Muslims, very different stereotypes. Uh, but the ones about uh the ones the the the Jewish stereotypes are have been long standing. I mean, they've been going, I mean, anti anti-Semitism or anti-Jewish prejudice has been around for two or three millennia, uh, and it's kind of baked into everyday life, so much so that we don't even recognize it. Um, and the stereotypes about Jews are over in overall terms, these are stereotypes, remember, is that they are powerful. Uh their loyalties are not to the United Kingdom, they're actually to Israel and uh to uh to Jews generally. Uh they're manipulative, they're threatening. Uh, Danny Stone of the community chief executive of the um community security trust, a bit like many kind of immigrant groups, there are associations with vermin, insects, kind of reptiles, you know, kind of unpleasant things, things you don't want to be associated with, and that applies to all sorts of uh migrants and immigrants, and that applies to Jews as well. But he says that unusually Jewish stereotypes punch down, as in that case, but they also punch up. They're very clever, they're powerful, they control everything. Um, they're behind, they're they're behind the um global capitalism. Not only that, they're behind communism, they're everywhere, they control the banks, they control the media. And I think all of those things, when you take those stereotypes into account, it's not just the stereotype we're talking here, we're talking about the emotions that are associated with those stereotypes. Uh, and the the the uh the the emotions that are associated with those stereotypes are uh suspicion, envy, resentment, hostility. And so talking about the stereotypes is one thing, and people don't like talking about that even. But even when we do talk about those stereotypes, we need to talk about what emotions is that generating, and that's why you get the lack of and that's why the experience of Jewish employees is so uncomfortable because nobody's providing support, and then not people aren't providing support because of the stereotype, but also because of those negative emotions.

SPEAKER_03 10:19

So, what what do you think that HR departments and employers more generally could be doing to try and battle this in the workforce?

SPEAKER_02 10:30

It's not just HR, uh Rob, it's actually the DEI profession. When people talk about diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace, it's always been about women, like always, since the beginning, it's always been about women, even though diversity is much more than that, uh, as we all know. But it's always been about women, and for many years it was white women. Other things would be disregarded. Race kind of it kind of paid attention, we didn't pay attention until George Floyd. And all of a sudden, you know, uh lockdown, and um, we could all witness that horrific event, and then the passions were aroused, and people started looking more closely at race. But Jews, uh a group like Jews, are actually not considered to be discriminated against because they're so powerful, they're not considered to be uh a group that experiences discrimination because they are so privileged, they are so rich. Uh, and so as a consequence, you don't get that degree of sympathy uh when these events happen. And I have come across this when I'm I talk about anti-Semitism in the workplace, you get, yeah, it's terrible, but they do all right generally, yeah. But look what's happening in Israel, which is actually nothing to do with the way Jews are treated in the workplace, incidentally. I know people try to drag me into a conversation about you know about Israel and Israel's policies and all this kind of stuff. I have no interest. Well, when I talk about um anti-Semitism in the workplace, I have no interest in what's what is the Israeli government is doing, uh, apart from the fact it has an impact in our workplaces. You can't use any excuse for bullying, harassment, discrimination, exclusion, isolation of Jews in the workplace. You can't use any excuse for that, irrespective of what's happened a thousand miles away.

SPEAKER_03 12:11

So, what what practical steps can employers take, do you think?

SPEAKER_02 12:17

We've been running um anti-Semitism at work week this week, and uh the and the first uh webinar we had was looking at the background to this, and I end up with actions that organizations can take. The last action, Rob, pay attention, don't ignore it. I mean, we need things on policies. Actually, we can we can have leaders speaking up about anti-semitism in the workplace and about the impact it's having on our colleagues at work. You don't, and and I have come across people like, oh, well, you know, George Floyd, it was obvious that was wrong, so that's why we made a statement. Ukraine, Russia, it's obvious as an aggressor. Uh, Israel, Gaza, oh, ooh, that's really complicated. I don't want to make a statement. Well, you don't make you don't make a statement about Israel-Gaza, you talk about how our colleagues are being impacted by this and what our response to be, what our response should be to that. Uh, and so people kind of have got very confused here, thinking they have to make a comment about that over there. When we talk about this here and our colleagues, and and uh for an HR perspective, you know, because uh people are the Jews aren't talking about their experience in the workplace, when they're doing it, they're doing it very carefully and and it kind of very muted and uh very politely. What came out from up from the work we were doing was actually just the depth of the experiences uh and how how separate they feel from other people in the organization, and from an HR and organizational perspective, people were thinking about leaving the organization, which is inevitable. If you if you feel isolated, you don't feel supported, you don't feel valued, you're going to be gone. And kind of more shocking than that, people thinking not just leaving the organization, they're thinking about leaving their profession and leaving the United Kingdom.

SPEAKER_01 14:05

I mean, the depth of feeling is just kind of can be judged by how safe people feel. Is it taking, you know, you know, is it taking small groups of people, individual talks with with people, or encouraging encouraging um people to come to HR and expressing their fears and doubts?

SPEAKER_02 14:27

Yeah, they they can, but they there's there's uh one obstacle they've got to overcome first is that well actually something like a quarter of people in our sample said they had talked to HR about this. About half of people said they had no confidence that anything was going to be done. So people are so actually this is this is the the I so only uh something like a very high proportion of people had had felt um they'd been discriminated against since the 7th of October. A small proportion of those reported it to HR, and then but half of our sample said they had no confidence that uh complaining about these things in their organizations were going to deal with uh going to sort these things out. So the first thing Adam, I think, is actually for HR, rather than just ask people to come forward, they've got to show, they've got to talk about these things, uh demonstrating they understand, first of all, um, because that confidence has to be built up in HR for people to come forward.

SPEAKER_01 15:25

Yeah, and do you think that to an extent the government has to set the tone? I mean, I I I I think from my own point of view that that Keir Starmer has um has been stridently um opposed to anti-Semitism and has spoken up over it. And I do you think that organizations and companies take the lead from that and give it gives them more confidence to tackle that in the workplace?

SPEAKER_02 15:51

Yeah, I but his wife's Jewish, isn't she? That's true. Yeah, and uh uh I think he has been very strong on this in a way that um other members of the party have not been. Uh sets a tone, but the the tone is very much around security, that people you know should be leading safe lives, and you know that uh we need to create places where you know, if anything happens, the perpetrators can be found quickly and that sort of thing. But as several people have told me recently, the Jewish community doesn't want higher walls, it doesn't want more security guards, it doesn't want more video surveillance, it actually wants none of those things. People in the community want to live their lives like everybody else does. The simplest thing that an individual can do in the organization, uh actually, going back to Rob, Rob's point, is that the most straightforward thing is for for people who are not Jewish to talk about this topic in the workplace, not in a small, not necessarily in a small group setting, but just at their desk. When the pandemic was on, the uh we did research into anti-Chinese prejudice. Right. Uh and there was a great example we had, this was just before lockdown, about a woman who was on a packed bus in Manchester, a woman of Chinese heritage on a packed bus in Manchester going into work, people standing. The only seat available was the one next to her. Nobody wanted to sit next to her, which made her feel bad enough. And then opposite her, this guy he just started uh having a go at her. You're responsible for this. Why didn't you go back home? You've landed, you know, you've created all these, and people are dying because of you, etc. etc. And then she felt even more isolated. And then this guy got up on the bus and he stepped forward and he sat in the seat next to her. He didn't say anything to this other guy. And she this is what she told me. He didn't say anything to him. He just sat down and just sat next to her. I don't think he even said anything to her. All of a sudden, that guy stopped, that guy stopped shouting because he knew that she she had support for him and others, and he better keep his cup shut. It wasn't confrontational, but it's very significant. And I think things like that in the workplace will count a lot for people.

SPEAKER_00 18:08

I was gonna say, is it a leadership issue as well? On you know, to go further on that point, if leaders aren't saying anything, is is it because they're afraid of saying the wrong thing? So they think, well, I'm better off not saying anything at all, because that leadership support would help people talk about it, wouldn't it?

SPEAKER_02 18:26

Yeah, I think that lead lets leaders off the hook. I don't I don't know how you can say the wrong thing here. If you if you're gonna say, actually, I don't know what to say about Israel Gaza, you shouldn't be saying anything about that anyway. That's nothing, that's a complicated issue, unless you're an expert in geopolitics, just stay out of that territory. I people have asked me what what do I think about Israel-Gaza? I said, you know, what do you think the solution? I thought, what do I think the solution is? I mean, it's like I know nothing about it. Uh I've got views about it, but I got nothing informed. I've got nothing to say about that, but I do have things to say about the workplace. So uh uh, but you can say something about your workplace and the way you expect people to be treated in your workplace. So I think this thing about uh people are afraid of saying the wrong thing, I don't think I think that's let them off the hook, to be honest. You could say something about your workplace, the way things are going. Uh, and it's not just about this topic. Leaders could leaders, some leaders in organizations were were almost forced into saying something about George, you know, George Floyd and uh black colleagues and this sort of thing. I think many leaders don't see it as important. I one of the responses I get is that when I say we did this research, uh, anti-Semitism, or like this week, you know, we we've had anti-Semitism at work week. One response, the most common response I get, because yeah, you know, but one response is yeah, thank goodness we don't have that in our place. And then the other response is uh, yeah, uh, we have a Jewish um employee resource group, and that's not even an answer, you know. They've said something which is not even an answer, and the irony of you know, and when I ask them what why is that important? Oh, well, it's somewhere safe for our Jewish colleagues to go and talk. And the irony of it is never occurs to them, is actually if that's the only place where Jewish colleagues can feel safe to talk about these issues, what does that tell you about the rest of the organization?

SPEAKER_03 20:17

It's not inclusion, is it?

SPEAKER_02 20:19

Uh well, to be honest, Rob, and it's maybe maybe you can invite me back on the podcast, but I find that about ERGs anyway. If people need to say all these safe spaces to talk about these things, you don't have inclusion.

SPEAKER_03 20:30

Very interesting. Adam, did you just want to say something?

SPEAKER_01 20:33

Yeah, I just wonder if um part of the problem with leadership and and express expressing support is that's a lot of people don't feel they have the language, and they they they do feel that they're gonna get it wrong. And you know, if you express something slightly clumsily, it it gets taken the wrong way. And and people Yeah, but then be honest about it.

SPEAKER_02 20:56

I'm I I I'm gonna talk about something today, which is a very important topic. I think it's an important topic that we discussed here today, and I want to kind of make it clear what my position on this is. If I say something which offends you or I use a phrase which is outmoded, then please don't make your first response anger. Exactly. I'm willing to learn, correct me, I'm happy to be corrected. Yeah, but we need to have this discussion, and I'm having this discussion, despite the fact that I have my own worries that I don't I'm not completely up to date with the correct terminology.

SPEAKER_01 21:33

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 21:33

So just share that with people.

SPEAKER_01 21:35

Yeah, so you set the pra you're setting the parameters of the discussion to help people say the right thing in a sense, aren't you? You're setting the parameters so so they they can fit in with that. And that shouldn't stop you from having a c a conversation. Exactly, yeah. No, that's that's that's right. Yeah, I think it's good. You're encouraging discourse, you know. We can hear your dog barking in the car.

SPEAKER_03 21:57

Oh, you can hear the dog barking. All right, sorry about that. I've got my. Don't worry, it's fine. Okay, thank you, Beda. Some really pertinent things to be thinking about there.

Maximum workplace temperatures

SPEAKER_03 22:07

We're going to move on to Joe now. Joe, you've been looking into maximum workplace temperatures. Tell me more.

SPEAKER_00 22:15

Yeah, so um very apparite at the moment because we're facing 29 degrees. Um, we will be uh transparent here and mention that we're recording this on the Friday before it goes out and it will hit 29 today, set to get even hotter over the weekend. And um obviously, as we live in the UK, we can't cope with that. And so the um the Climate Change Committee has um is issued a report this week and it's suggested that we should have a target range of temperatures to protect workers because obviously we have overall rising global temperatures, we're having more frequent heat waves, uh, so it's looking at what are the potential harms to different types of workers. Um, also it's suggesting that there are potential harms to how we go about our daily lives, which I think is quite dramatic, but but yeah, still.

SPEAKER_03 23:08

So, Joe, this was a report by the Climate Change Committee that was looking into the UK's adaptation to rising temperatures. I mean, we've we've heard a lot in the past, particularly from union bodies, around the idea that the UK should have a maximum workplace temperature. How is it set at the moment? I know there is no single figure, but the health and safety executive must have some regulations on this in some form.

SPEAKER_00 23:39

Yeah, so in terms of the legislation, it's the health and safety regulations of 1992, and but the only thing they determine is that we have appropriate temperatures or reasonable temperatures. And the thing about that is that if you work in a bakery, for example, a hot a high temperature is you maybe you're going to be more resilient to a higher temperature than somebody who works in an office. You it might be that different groups in the workplace experience heat differently. So older workers, uh menopausal workers, for example, will feel climate temperature different to younger people, for example. So there's there's so many factors to take into it. And that's why I think they've always moved away from a one size fits all. But I mean, that doesn't mean we we shouldn't have it, and they're suggesting this target range between 16 and 25, which is quite a big range, really. And I think if so, the government can look at this advice, and it says it's looking at this advice, but I doubt we'd get actually get any legislation in response to it. It's not going to be like Spain, where they have a set maximum temperature at one, and then some countries have one for indoors and one for outdoors. Um and what's the temperature in Spain that they they give as a maximum? It's 27 for indoor work and 25 for light physical work, apparently. Right, okay. So um, which isn't that high really if you're if you're working in Spain. But the TUC wants something similar here, but I I just don't see how it would work in practice.

SPEAKER_03 25:09

Bina, I gather that you've looked at workplace temperatures and and and some of the conversations that might go on in in workplaces around this and how it affects people, particularly school children, I think you mentioned.

SPEAKER_02 25:22

Well, it's it's it's the the uh school children, the people in the workplace are kind of affected in the same sort of ways. A lot of the kind of focus is on the physical effects of heat, dehydration and um you know other physiological effects. Actually, the re more recent research is showing that it has cognitive impacts as well. Tasks that require uh more complex decision making and reasoning are affected more than other tasks. And that's why the research on school children is important. Actually, when temperatures get very high, children do worse in exams. But the same the same thing happens in in the workplaces, strategic thinking, problem solving, decision making, all of those things they they put they put demands on working memory, and working memory is affected in the heat because our energy is being put uh elsewhere. But the other thing has also been found is is that up until relatively recently, the effect of temperature on performance was seen as an inverted U curve. So if it's too cold, performance is poor, if it's too hot, performance is poor, and there's an optimum point in the middle where we feel comfortable in that temperature. But more recent research shows actually it's more like a plateau. So too cold is poor, too hot is poor, but instead of just going up and down, it it kind of goes up and then it plateaus before before tailing off. And what that shows is we are remarkably good at adapting to temperatures. So Joe's point about it's difficult to identify a point at which you know we take further action, we actually are very good at adapting uh to temperatures, and that needs to be taken into account. And as Joe said also, there are individual differences on this. I think one of the the for me, one of the things is actually about how do we schedule work. If problem solving, big decisions, you know, complex tasks are being performed, you're better off doing those things earlier in the day when it's cooler. The tasks that are less affected are the repetitive tasks and uh the things that are more routine. So, actually, something to do around scheduling can also have an impact then in terms of our performance.

SPEAKER_00 27:34

That's one of the recommendations of the committee is that you start earlier, especially if you've got this deep cognitive work going on. And then obviously visit physical work is another issue as well, though, isn't it? Because you've got to think about people working on construction sites and how you support them during hot periods, you know, you know, can can you afford to get a canopy and all that sort of thing. So most of it's common sense, isn't it?

SPEAKER_03 27:55

Yeah, I I think it is, and I think also that that I think many managers, um, especially if if they're working in the same place as as the employees that are being affected by the heat, then it's yes in their interest as well to help. And I and I think most managers will will do that. So it doesn't necessarily need a sort of corporate approach.

SPEAKER_02 28:17

The other thing about mandating a temperature for a building, so actually, what the research has shown is where you give people some control over this, actually they perform better. People can open a window or have a fan or do things which can which can impact their immediate environment. Actually, people feel far more comfortable in that situation rather than having it mandated that the building is this temperature.

SPEAKER_01 28:41

It makes it makes you wonder how in the in the past, you know, before we studied effects on productivity of temperature and on people's ability to work, in the past, when there was no air conditioning, work must have changed so much in summer and winter. People must have adapted in ways that we probably have lost sight of now.

SPEAKER_00 29:01

And since we started working from home as well, I remember there was there was a period during the pandemic when air conditioning was a premium, so people were flocking back to the office all of a sudden without the mandate, just so they could stay cool.

SPEAKER_03 29:15

Some good times there. I remember the pandemic well. We always come back to the pandemic because it was such a unique time in our lives. The Personnel Today HR podcast is brought to you by Deal. Hire, manage, and pay anyone, anywhere.

Bolt CEO's comments about HR

SPEAKER_03 29:31

Adam, I believe you've been looking into uh some comments made by a tech bro.

SPEAKER_01 29:37

Uh yes, this was this was a story that came up yesterday, actually. I mean, the media loves a story in which HR gets a good kicking. Um, it's a company called Bolt, not the taxi firm, but uh financial, uh fintech, I believe is the term. And they're quite young chief executive, Ryan Breslo. I think he's been brought back to the company, um, and he's been brought back to sort of re-revamp it, reboot it. And he has got rid of the HR team, and he's given some wonderful quotes. We have eliminated HR. We had an HR team, and that HR team was creating problems that didn't exist. Those problems disappeared when I let them go. But he he said that the company's now had to go back to basics and it's employed a smaller people operations team. In fact, it's called the people operations team. And he's he said that uh we're back in start-up mode again, and those HR professionals have really important insights when you're in a peacetime and when you're at a larger company. But this doesn't mean we don't value culture, oversight, or checks and balances. In fact, the opposite. For serious employee treatment issues, someone can escalate to a superior or people ops team member. And then he says, he rounds off with his uh I really enjoy this one. I've concluded that HR is the wrong energy, format, and approach. People ops empowers managers, streamlines decision making, and keeps the company moving at lightning speed.

SPEAKER_03 31:10

So I mean, this sounds rather like semantics, really. So is he basically saying he doesn't want to call his HR team HR anymore? But um, and he's got rid of some people who irritated him, but now he's got a people operations team, which they should call it personnel.

SPEAKER_01 31:28

Yeah, that's right, personnel. But um, no, but he he is he is actually playing into a very common theme that HR has somehow got very large and soft and stops people doing things. If we go back to our our favorite uh philosopher from the late 20 teens, Jordan Peterson. Um gosh. I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, but but he did have a lot, a big YouTube audience, and he did say things about HR that a lot of people enjoyed, even if they didn't agree with it. He was very against, for example, the gender pay gap because women are different from men. He thought that HR's involvement in trying to ensure equality was a complete waste of time, and further proof that HR HR was a wasted resource.

SPEAKER_03 32:15

It has become a common trope, hasn't it? I mean, I do you remember when some people broke into, I think it was RAF Bryce Norton, someone on from the Reform UK party made a comment that the person who was in charge of the site at the time was an HR manager, as if that was how irresponsible of the RAF.

SPEAKER_01 32:36

Well, it's actually worse than that, Rob. It was it was actually that it was a woman in charge. You know, it's a sort of a great sign of how ridiculous uh equality and diversity is, that the REF have appointed a woman to be in charge of an RAF base, and therefore these things have happened, you know, because the security wasn't strong enough. Binner said something earlier when he talked about people feeling isolated, wanting to leave companies because of how they're feeling unsupported in the workplace. Isn't isn't that exactly what HR is there for? To to ensure that people don't feel like that. Because these things have an effect on productivity on the bottom line. That's why HR is how it is, and that's why HR does talk about equality, about supporting people. It's it's not a wasted resource, it's uh it's stopping people leaving. But there's so much culture war now. Beno, let's bring you in here.

SPEAKER_02 33:33

What do what do you say to the irony of it is here that it doesn't seem to have stopped him from doing what he wants to do. He actually said that he came back into the organization and told the leadership team that had taken over after he'd left that they had 60 days to change. Yeah, and in 60 days they didn't, so he got rid of them all. So I don't see how HR stopped him from behaving in this quite arrogant, cruel way towards individuals. And he's also got rid of HR, so HR didn't stop him from getting rid of HR. So I don't see, but he's also complaining about the culture that people feel entitled, that they feel privileged, that they are they're complaining about things all the time. But people are doing that on their own, they're not doing that because of HR, they're doing that because of a tone that's set by the leaders. If he's saying that the the organization's not performing, he's found a convenient scapegoat, but he's still got a problem. The HR people aren't managing every single person in this organization, the managers are. Um, it's just an excuse for him to be able to do what he wants to do and find a reason for giving himself license to carry out the things that he wants to carry out with any without anybody ever saying, Oh, hang on a minute, do you think there might be a problem with that? The the other the other thing, just finally, uh that what he's doing here, he's saying if you've got a complaint, I'm gonna consider you to be privileged and that you are you feel entitled. That's why you're complaining. So he's got all he's got all his excuses here. Uh so if you do have a complaint, maybe about the direction of the company, are you going to tell Ryan Breslow, I think I might be better off doing this, Ryan. This whole point about psychological safety, uh, and it's kind of got mutated over the years, and people say that you know, people who should know better say that Amy Emerson invented psychological safety, she didn't, so she doesn't claim that other people do. It was invented in 1965 by uh two um academics, Warren Bennis and Edgar Schein, and it was precisely for the things that he's talking about about organizational change. People don't we don't like change, human beings don't like change. In order to create change, we need to understand why that change is happening. We need to un we need to be able to ask questions to be able to understand that further, and then you are more likely to get a quicker, more successful change than if you didn't do that. What he's doing, that he wants to change from this entitled, privileged, complaining culture by threatening to get rid of people, he's doing the opposite of creating psychological safety.

SPEAKER_01 36:00

That's right, and also but also I mean, research does tell us that collaborative decision making is more effective. Maybe it's a slightly American thing at the moment. It's this idea that one person can be all powerful, and it's it's it's almost an enjoyment of power. It reminds me a little bit, it was a British entrepreneur who famously got rid of email because there were some problems. I think it was a phone company, wasn't it? There was a there was a TV documentary about him, and he he revealed some some difficulties in in stock taking and and ordering replacement parts, and it was because people weren't getting the emails or didn't understand each other's emails. So what he did was get rid of all emails, and he sat there with a massive grin on his face saying, I've cancelled emails. Of course, after a few weeks, the emails had to come back, they had to come back. Yeah, it's about power, it's about power and people exercising power because they're not collaborating.

SPEAKER_02 36:58

It's gonna be interesting following him. I hadn't come across him before, Ryan Breslow. It's gonna be interesting following him because you can you can you can see examples from the not too distant past, actually, like Fred the Shred Goodwin at um RBS, yeah, uh kind of all powerful, doing what he wants to do, share prices going up, profits are growing up, etc. etc. He was involved in all sorts of transactions and then uh allowed to get away with it, didn't have much approval from the non-execs, but they said don't do this again. And of course, he just went further and further until it actually destroyed them. And it'd be interesting to see what happens here. He doesn't want checks and balances, I would wager Ryan Breslow. He talks about checks and balances, he's talking about other people, not him.

SPEAKER_03 37:39

Yeah, but well, I mean, I think it it feels like a lot of it is related to the fact that four years ago the company was worth 11 billion dollars and and now it's worth more like 300 million dollars. So yeah, he's right to say he's in wartime because he's he's battling to save the company in some way, which I presume he's still got a lot of the shares in.

SPEAKER_02 37:59

I mean, he's not in wartime, but he's in he's in a pickle, the organization's in a hole, it's not in wartime. The HR HR were not the cause of those problems he's talking about. This sort of language is kind of uh this language is creeping back into uh creeping back into uh corporate speech, you know. You want to be a credible CEO or senior senior official in an organization, somebody asks you what's your favorite book, always say the art of war. Always say it, always say the art because it makes you look like you're aggressive and powerful, uh, and also quite philosophical. And the best thing about it, Rob, you don't even have to have read it. Nobody else has, and nobody's gonna ask you a question about it.

SPEAKER_03 38:43

Yeah, perfect. Okay, that's all we have time for. Remember to subscribe to this podcast wherever you get your podcasts. And if you're interested in taking part and want to share something, do drop me a line by emailing rob.moss at personneltoday.com. Our next episode is scheduled to drop on the last Wednesday of the month. So the next one is the 24th of June. The Personnel Today HR podcast is brought to you by Deal. Hire, manage, and pay anyone anywhere. Thanks for listening, and thanks to Bimekandola for taking the time to join us.

SPEAKER_02 39:20

Thank you.

SPEAKER_03 39:21

Goodbye, everyone.

SPEAKER_02 39:22

Bye bye.

SPEAKER_03 39:23

See you later.