On Wanting an HR Robot and Not an HR Person

This morning, a large international creative agency turned me down for an HR position after over a month of interviews. Their Technical Recruiter called me to inform me of their decision. The reason why I wasn't chosen?

I wasn't transactional enough.

Seriously. They used the word transactional in our conversation —multiple times.

The recruiter told me that they felt that my approach to HR was too relational for the role they were trying to fill. They were looking for someone who could do the transactional HR work without relational components. I was told that because my approach to HR tasks is relational, I might not be a "good fit" for the HR team but that when they expand their DEI team in the future, they will keep me in mind, so they'd like to stay in touch.

Again, their words. Not me paraphrasing or reading between the lines. These are the actual words the recruiter said to me this morning.

I'm not good enough to be a part of their transactional HR team, but I'm a Black person who cares about people, so I'd be a "great fit" for the DEI team!

Geez. Oof. Foot in mouth.

Real talk, though? I was honestly quite impressed.

Someone in HR finally had the guts to say the silent part aloud.

My entire career in HR has been spent watching people with power, privilege, and positionality avoid telling me they dislike how relational I am and need me to be way less human than I am as their HR person.

I've known for some time now that I've been a stone's throw from one of these senior leaders I've worked with admitting that my HR philosophy makes them angry or uncomfortable. They want me to toe the company line, wield policies like weapons, and disregard most workplace harm. But telling me that level of truth? That also makes them uncomfortable. So instead of sitting with honesty, the conversations have always veered toward me somehow being a "problem" or needing to change "little" things about how I discuss accountability for leaders and processes. No one wants to admit that they want HR to be what HR historically has been: the workplace police, a hammer of patriarchal white supremacist workplace culture.

Yeah...that ain't me.

Honesty around wanting a transactional HR person on your staff. Well, damn. What a breath of fresh air.

What a smelly, rank, moist yet somehow dry breath of "fresh" air.

On "Multiple Truths," White Supremacist Workplace Culture, and the Right to Comfort

I used to have a white supervisor who hired me to do equity and anti-racism work. I would tell them the findings of my investigations into incidents of racism and white supremacy. I told them about my conversations with employees and the discomfort that many white employees, especially senior leadership, had with discussing the topics of racism and white supremacy. This supervisor, the organization's CEO, regularly tried their damndest to explain why this was the case. When I wouldn't allow them to blame me for the discomfort of their white leaders or place the blame on other factors (including placing responsibility on the few employees of color they had), they opted to try a tactic as old as time: gaslighting. Not only gaslighting, mind you, but a very particular kind of gaslighting intended to remove responsibility from the shoulders of white leaders.

This CEO told me that what I was sharing with them was one of "many truths" about what was going on in their workplace.

They said there were "multiple truths" at play and that we needed to consider the "truths" of the white people in the organization. They began trying to push the narrative that the organization needed me to center the "psychological comfort" of white senior leaders so that they could "speak their truth" and "be heard."

Yeah...no.

Hell no.

I shut that nonsense down quicker than a hiccup.

My time with that organization didn't last much longer past that moment.

Listen here, white "professionals": there is no such thing as "multiple truths" if your employees and colleagues that are part of the Global Majority are harmed by your white supremacist workplace culture and white people with power in your organization. There are no "multiple truths" at play if you are called in or called out for being racist. No " truth " will absolve you from being responsible for your toxicity. The only "truth" we should be talking about is that you don't want accountability for your racist beliefs, actions, and company policies and procedures. You don't get to decide that your narrative of your racism, and upholding white supremacy should be viewed on the same level as the truth shared by those you harm.

I don't deal in "multiple truths" or "alternative truths."

That's harmful people sh--.

That's harmful white people who don't want to be held accountable for their toxicity sh--. I don't support that nonsense, regardless of salary.

Your "truth" when it comes to racism and upholding white comfort is invalid because your "truth" is a good/bad binary white supremacist fairytale, white “professionals.”

And that's the truth, ruth.

Just Because You Could Be A Manager Doesn't Mean You Should Be A Manager

Image description: A white man in a business suit is cowering on the left side of a room while a gigantic suit jacket-covered right arm with a clenched fist comes toward him from the right side of the room.

Some people shouldn’t be managers, supervisors, senior leaders, or decision-makers for your company or organization.

If you’re thinking of promoting someone into a leadership role after working for your company for years - or you currently have folx who have been “locked into” management positions for years - and they:

• Regularly use the wrong pronouns when referring to employees, even after being corrected on multiple occasions;

• Consistently make sexist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, ableist, and body-shaming comments or swiftly defend others in the organization who make similar comments;

•  Exhibit that they are unwilling or unable to receive feedback or take responsibility for issues in the workplace with direct correlation to them and their management style;

•  Have a multitude of employee-submitted grievances or employee complaints on file;

•  Have shown an unwillingness to do their work and process their beliefs and views around racism, white supremacy, misogyny, hate, and oppressive states and how all of the aforementioned do harm to others;

•  Make an ordeal and power play out of employees needing time off or flexible scheduling to take care of themselves and their families;

•  Shame or belittle employees who ask for support or accommodations at work;

•  Gleefully gossips about others in the company, especially those in their department, and often with derogatory comments about their appearance or what they perceive as the person’s work ethic;

•  Regularly responds to emails from Global Majority folx by ignoring the content of said emails and sending them a list of “corrections”;

• Routinely participates in or facilitates gaslighting and invalidation activities toward employees from marginalized communities who speak up, call in, and call out;

Then this person shouldn’t be a manager, supervisor, senior leader, or decision-maker for your company or organization. And if you think they should, and that none of the above should factor into your decision to make them a leader or decision-maker?

All of the above likely fits you like a glove as well.

YOU probably shouldn’t be a manager, supervisor, senior leader, or decision-maker for your company or organization.