Dear CiteHR Members,
I'm working in a company as Assistant HR Manager for the past 1 year and 4 months, where the size of the company is around 25. Everything was going well on my part.
A month and 20 days ago, I was introduced by our CEO to a new investor, who is the Managing Director of a Batteries Organization. Later, he interacted with every employee in the office. Our CEO went out of town for a project, and this new investor came to the office to observe how we operate in the CEO's absence. When he was leaving, he asked me to sit at the reception for ambiance, to which I responded, "the receptionist will be at the reception." He became immediately angry and asked, "what is a receptionist?" When I began explaining, he left without listening. I informed our CEO about this. He replied, "try to explain your problem clearly, focus on compliance-related work for now, we will discuss other matters when I return." I acknowledged his instructions.
After two days, he returned and shared his success story and mentioned a lady who worked for him before he started his own company. He criticized me, implying that I was only concerned about my benefit and not the company's, mentioning "false prestige," "inferiority feeling," "degradation feeling," and more. I became emotional as he did not allow me to respond properly.
During a meeting with our CEO, he defended me by saying that I had shown improvement and needed to learn something new every day.
Subsequently, when the receptionist was needed, another person was assigned. From then on, he started giving me menial tasks similar to those of a housekeeper.
One day, in the absence of our CEO, he informed me that only four departments were necessary, without mentioning the HR department, which handles salaries. He questioned why other companies were closing down, etc. I did not discuss this with our CEO.
When our CEO was away again, he asked if our CEO had mentioned anything about my employment. I replied, "no," but another person close to the CEO suggested I search for a new job and serve the notice period. As I began looking for a new job and started getting offers, he asked our CEO to retain me by offering less pay than I currently receive. He also commented in front of our CEO that I am good and hardworking.
I am now unsure about what to do. Please advise me, seniors.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1I'm working in a company as Assistant HR Manager for the past 1 year and 4 months, where the size of the company is around 25. Everything was going well on my part.
A month and 20 days ago, I was introduced by our CEO to a new investor, who is the Managing Director of a Batteries Organization. Later, he interacted with every employee in the office. Our CEO went out of town for a project, and this new investor came to the office to observe how we operate in the CEO's absence. When he was leaving, he asked me to sit at the reception for ambiance, to which I responded, "the receptionist will be at the reception." He became immediately angry and asked, "what is a receptionist?" When I began explaining, he left without listening. I informed our CEO about this. He replied, "try to explain your problem clearly, focus on compliance-related work for now, we will discuss other matters when I return." I acknowledged his instructions.
After two days, he returned and shared his success story and mentioned a lady who worked for him before he started his own company. He criticized me, implying that I was only concerned about my benefit and not the company's, mentioning "false prestige," "inferiority feeling," "degradation feeling," and more. I became emotional as he did not allow me to respond properly.
During a meeting with our CEO, he defended me by saying that I had shown improvement and needed to learn something new every day.
Subsequently, when the receptionist was needed, another person was assigned. From then on, he started giving me menial tasks similar to those of a housekeeper.
One day, in the absence of our CEO, he informed me that only four departments were necessary, without mentioning the HR department, which handles salaries. He questioned why other companies were closing down, etc. I did not discuss this with our CEO.
When our CEO was away again, he asked if our CEO had mentioned anything about my employment. I replied, "no," but another person close to the CEO suggested I search for a new job and serve the notice period. As I began looking for a new job and started getting offers, he asked our CEO to retain me by offering less pay than I currently receive. He also commented in front of our CEO that I am good and hardworking.
I am now unsure about what to do. Please advise me, seniors.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Madhuri,
You have presented your version of the story. We need to hear the other side as well. Without understanding the perspectives of both sides, balanced views cannot be communicated.
Nonetheless, if I am to assume that you have not filtered any information, then I would suggest that it may be worthwhile to leave the company. A person who hesitates or acts inconsistently cannot be relied upon in the long term.
Sometimes, having a lower designation can be advantageous. When faced with peculiar instructions, you could have requested him to send the message in writing to all employees. You could have simply stated, "I am just Asst HR." Given the high value of the instructions, an office circular bearing your signature would have been respected by all employees.
You have a job now, so why worry about the investor's behavior? I strongly advise you to stand your ground and move on to the new company. Your CEO should have been wise enough to advise the investor to not interfere in the administration. The CEO could have instructed the investor to accept a certain percentage of returns and remain silent. However, this was not done. The CEO is underestimating the intrusiveness of the investor. He will have to face the consequences for that.
Best regards,
Dinesh V Divekar
Management & Behavioral Training Consultant
Bangalore - 560094
"Limit of your words is the limit of your world"
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You have presented your version of the story. We need to hear the other side as well. Without understanding the perspectives of both sides, balanced views cannot be communicated.
Nonetheless, if I am to assume that you have not filtered any information, then I would suggest that it may be worthwhile to leave the company. A person who hesitates or acts inconsistently cannot be relied upon in the long term.
Sometimes, having a lower designation can be advantageous. When faced with peculiar instructions, you could have requested him to send the message in writing to all employees. You could have simply stated, "I am just Asst HR." Given the high value of the instructions, an office circular bearing your signature would have been respected by all employees.
You have a job now, so why worry about the investor's behavior? I strongly advise you to stand your ground and move on to the new company. Your CEO should have been wise enough to advise the investor to not interfere in the administration. The CEO could have instructed the investor to accept a certain percentage of returns and remain silent. However, this was not done. The CEO is underestimating the intrusiveness of the investor. He will have to face the consequences for that.
Best regards,
Dinesh V Divekar
Management & Behavioral Training Consultant
Bangalore - 560094
"Limit of your words is the limit of your world"
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Madhuri,
I do not know what specific suggestion you are looking for:
Whether you should continue in this company or not?
Is this what you want to ask?
The situation that you have recounted does not appear good. You might have heard the Hindi saying: "Andher Nagri, Chaupat Raja..." which loosely means one should not stay in a place ruled by an incompetent and temperamental person.
As you have already experienced how the top bosses blow hot and cold without displaying any sound principles of management, what kind of future can one see in such an organization where they change their minds at the drop of a hat?
I am more concerned about the kind of game that is being played, the kind of pressure tactics that are being applied to you. It has nothing to do with the job description or the requirements of your job.
The only redeeming feature that I can see is, since it employs about 25 people, it is bound to comply with the employer's obligations and duties under the Sexual Harassment at Workplace Act 2013. In fact, you can even compel them to constitute an Internal Complaints Committee.
My suggestion would be to look for other better opportunities and stay far from such proprietorship-like concerns.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I do not know what specific suggestion you are looking for:
Whether you should continue in this company or not?
Is this what you want to ask?
The situation that you have recounted does not appear good. You might have heard the Hindi saying: "Andher Nagri, Chaupat Raja..." which loosely means one should not stay in a place ruled by an incompetent and temperamental person.
As you have already experienced how the top bosses blow hot and cold without displaying any sound principles of management, what kind of future can one see in such an organization where they change their minds at the drop of a hat?
I am more concerned about the kind of game that is being played, the kind of pressure tactics that are being applied to you. It has nothing to do with the job description or the requirements of your job.
The only redeeming feature that I can see is, since it employs about 25 people, it is bound to comply with the employer's obligations and duties under the Sexual Harassment at Workplace Act 2013. In fact, you can even compel them to constitute an Internal Complaints Committee.
My suggestion would be to look for other better opportunities and stay far from such proprietorship-like concerns.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello Madhuri,
Raj Kumar has a very valid point: 'What specific suggestions are you looking for?'
@ Raj Kumar--
Frankly, I think you are overshooting the situation by suggesting that this situation falls under the ambit of the Sexual Harassment at Workplace Act 2013. Unless misconstrued, this can't be termed as such.
@ Madhuri--
Coming to the situation you mentioned, like both Dinesh & Raj Kumar mentioned, this is YOUR side of the story.
However, I THINK I know the Batteries Company you are referring to--so I would tend to give your version more weight than them.
Coming to your query: 'Was I wrong?'
This isn't a 'right' or 'wrong' issue, I guess.
It's YOUR response that SHOULD have been different. You seem to have responded to the MD's comment to sit in the Reception by ASSUMING quite a few things. You could have asked the receptionist [IF you had one] to come & sit OR you could have sat to satisfy him & then LATER discussed with your CEO to find a long-term solution--please remember that this MD is the one who is investing & he would obviously be keen to see how & where his money goes.
For all you know, the MD MIGHT be just testing you... and you took a stance that CONVEYS an ego [please note that anyone's response is DECIDED by how he/she PERCEIVES what we say... NOT by what we mean/intend].
Or he COULD be preparing the ground to fire you?
In a nutshell, you COULD have acted with a bit of TACT.
Now, without mixing up issues, since the decision to fire you has been conveyed to you AND you too have got a new job, I suggest DON'T change your stance--it depends on your comfort level in the new job. Raj Kumar's proverb is an apt one here.
Just tell your CEO that you made a commitment to the new Company--AND DON'T reveal the new Company's name--handle it with tact without saying 'I won't tell you'.
Hope you get the point.
All the Best.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Raj Kumar has a very valid point: 'What specific suggestions are you looking for?'
@ Raj Kumar--
Frankly, I think you are overshooting the situation by suggesting that this situation falls under the ambit of the Sexual Harassment at Workplace Act 2013. Unless misconstrued, this can't be termed as such.
@ Madhuri--
Coming to the situation you mentioned, like both Dinesh & Raj Kumar mentioned, this is YOUR side of the story.
However, I THINK I know the Batteries Company you are referring to--so I would tend to give your version more weight than them.
Coming to your query: 'Was I wrong?'
This isn't a 'right' or 'wrong' issue, I guess.
It's YOUR response that SHOULD have been different. You seem to have responded to the MD's comment to sit in the Reception by ASSUMING quite a few things. You could have asked the receptionist [IF you had one] to come & sit OR you could have sat to satisfy him & then LATER discussed with your CEO to find a long-term solution--please remember that this MD is the one who is investing & he would obviously be keen to see how & where his money goes.
For all you know, the MD MIGHT be just testing you... and you took a stance that CONVEYS an ego [please note that anyone's response is DECIDED by how he/she PERCEIVES what we say... NOT by what we mean/intend].
Or he COULD be preparing the ground to fire you?
In a nutshell, you COULD have acted with a bit of TACT.
Now, without mixing up issues, since the decision to fire you has been conveyed to you AND you too have got a new job, I suggest DON'T change your stance--it depends on your comfort level in the new job. Raj Kumar's proverb is an apt one here.
Just tell your CEO that you made a commitment to the new Company--AND DON'T reveal the new Company's name--handle it with tact without saying 'I won't tell you'.
Hope you get the point.
All the Best.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Taj Satish Sir,RajKumar Sir & Dinesh Sir, I thank you all for responding and for your advises. I’m feeling happy for becoming a member of CiteHr. Regards Madhuri
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear TS,
I agree with your point that the situation currently does not fall "under the ambit of Sexual Harassment at Workplace Act 2013."
However, I tend to look beyond the current situation and at some possible scenarios that might unfold.
Don't you think that it is better to be forewarned and be prepared for any eventuality that might crop up?
Or should one wait for some mishap to occur, and then act?
That is the reason I discussed the constitution of the Internal Committee under the Act, which is the duty of all employers employing more than 10 employees.
Secondly, it might scare off these kinds of employers from attempting mischief (the very word used by the member); and they will realize that there are laws above them that they have to follow.
I think the member (Ms. Madhuri) is undergoing stress and may not be open enough to discuss all her fears freely and openly. The fact that she used the word mischief points to something.
Moreover, my reference to the Act was also based on the circumstances that lead to, or are present in cases of sexual harassment.
As per the Act, these are:
"Section 3. Prevention of sexual harassment.
2. The following circumstances, among other circumstances, if they occur or are present in relation to or connected with any act or behavior of sexual harassment, may amount to sexual harassment:
i. implied or explicit promise of preferential treatment in her employment; or
ii. implied or explicit threat of detrimental treatment in her employment; or
iii. implied or explicit threat about her present or future employment status; or
iv. interference with her work or creating an intimidating or offensive or hostile work environment for her; or
v. humiliating treatment likely to affect her health or safety."
As one can see, these circumstances exist in this case.
This is what I wished to point out and raise an alert.
I appreciate your opinion, and the above is not to contradict your opinion but to add more facts and information for the larger benefit of all members. As seniors, we should not just restrict ourselves to answering the query but also provide more information and opinions that result in more learning.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I agree with your point that the situation currently does not fall "under the ambit of Sexual Harassment at Workplace Act 2013."
However, I tend to look beyond the current situation and at some possible scenarios that might unfold.
Don't you think that it is better to be forewarned and be prepared for any eventuality that might crop up?
Or should one wait for some mishap to occur, and then act?
That is the reason I discussed the constitution of the Internal Committee under the Act, which is the duty of all employers employing more than 10 employees.
Secondly, it might scare off these kinds of employers from attempting mischief (the very word used by the member); and they will realize that there are laws above them that they have to follow.
I think the member (Ms. Madhuri) is undergoing stress and may not be open enough to discuss all her fears freely and openly. The fact that she used the word mischief points to something.
Moreover, my reference to the Act was also based on the circumstances that lead to, or are present in cases of sexual harassment.
As per the Act, these are:
"Section 3. Prevention of sexual harassment.
2. The following circumstances, among other circumstances, if they occur or are present in relation to or connected with any act or behavior of sexual harassment, may amount to sexual harassment:
i. implied or explicit promise of preferential treatment in her employment; or
ii. implied or explicit threat of detrimental treatment in her employment; or
iii. implied or explicit threat about her present or future employment status; or
iv. interference with her work or creating an intimidating or offensive or hostile work environment for her; or
v. humiliating treatment likely to affect her health or safety."
As one can see, these circumstances exist in this case.
This is what I wished to point out and raise an alert.
I appreciate your opinion, and the above is not to contradict your opinion but to add more facts and information for the larger benefit of all members. As seniors, we should not just restrict ourselves to answering the query but also provide more information and opinions that result in more learning.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Madhuri,
Others have made valuable suggestions; hence, I will answer your question of "Was I wrong?" I assume this question refers to your response to the investor's request to "sit in the reception for the sake of ambiance." As you have not mentioned whether there was a receptionist present or not, and if there was one, where she was, I have assumed that the receptionist was away and he asked you to provide cover. If that was the case, then you were "out of order."
In other contexts, I have mentioned that especially in small organizations, we have to be flexible and perform various tasks. For instance, in a large organization where I worked, my boss took the duster and began cleaning the workbenches (like a cleaner) without even asking the lab technician to do it. When they saw him doing it, they volunteered. In another instance at a college, a female lab technician took on the role of a filing clerk when the Head of Department's secretary was on holiday. The HOD noticed this and, to summarize, encouraged her to take part-time teaching, eventually recommending her for a teachers' training course. This led to her becoming a successful Maths teacher. Had she not taken on the filing clerk's job, she might have retired only as a technician. The above examples are from the UK.
My sincere advice to bloggers on CiteHR is that we should not view any job as beneath our dignity. However, in a unionized environment, we should ensure that we do not perform tasks that violate union rules.
Wishing you all the best in your new job.
From United Kingdom
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Others have made valuable suggestions; hence, I will answer your question of "Was I wrong?" I assume this question refers to your response to the investor's request to "sit in the reception for the sake of ambiance." As you have not mentioned whether there was a receptionist present or not, and if there was one, where she was, I have assumed that the receptionist was away and he asked you to provide cover. If that was the case, then you were "out of order."
In other contexts, I have mentioned that especially in small organizations, we have to be flexible and perform various tasks. For instance, in a large organization where I worked, my boss took the duster and began cleaning the workbenches (like a cleaner) without even asking the lab technician to do it. When they saw him doing it, they volunteered. In another instance at a college, a female lab technician took on the role of a filing clerk when the Head of Department's secretary was on holiday. The HOD noticed this and, to summarize, encouraged her to take part-time teaching, eventually recommending her for a teachers' training course. This led to her becoming a successful Maths teacher. Had she not taken on the filing clerk's job, she might have retired only as a technician. The above examples are from the UK.
My sincere advice to bloggers on CiteHR is that we should not view any job as beneath our dignity. However, in a unionized environment, we should ensure that we do not perform tasks that violate union rules.
Wishing you all the best in your new job.
From United Kingdom
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Seniors,
There has been no receptionist since the date of my joining. I used to assist the HR & Admin Manager, but later, he moved to the sales department. I have been handling everything alone as ours is a small company. I don't mind doing housekeeping work when required, and during important occasions, I did so without any hesitation. However, someone (clearly displaying his authority) ordered me to do tasks even though our maid was present on the premises. This indicated a misunderstanding, as I initially declined to sit at the reception. At that time, he was new to our company. Subsequently, he would always approach me when our CEO was busy, seeking affirmation through nods and positive responses.
I complied with his requests, providing explanations, but he seemed unwilling to listen to others, insisting that others listen to him. Perhaps he had earned such authority and respect from his previous company's non-executives, but our office culture is notably different. Many employees, including myself, have been offended by his communication style and manner of addressing us. Our former CEO never treated us the way this new investor does. Our former CEO was more considerate and had a leadership style that involved working alongside us, never assigning tasks he wouldn't do himself. This stark contrast has made it challenging for me to make a decision.
Thank you.
Regards,
Madhuri
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There has been no receptionist since the date of my joining. I used to assist the HR & Admin Manager, but later, he moved to the sales department. I have been handling everything alone as ours is a small company. I don't mind doing housekeeping work when required, and during important occasions, I did so without any hesitation. However, someone (clearly displaying his authority) ordered me to do tasks even though our maid was present on the premises. This indicated a misunderstanding, as I initially declined to sit at the reception. At that time, he was new to our company. Subsequently, he would always approach me when our CEO was busy, seeking affirmation through nods and positive responses.
I complied with his requests, providing explanations, but he seemed unwilling to listen to others, insisting that others listen to him. Perhaps he had earned such authority and respect from his previous company's non-executives, but our office culture is notably different. Many employees, including myself, have been offended by his communication style and manner of addressing us. Our former CEO never treated us the way this new investor does. Our former CEO was more considerate and had a leadership style that involved working alongside us, never assigning tasks he wouldn't do himself. This stark contrast has made it challenging for me to make a decision.
Thank you.
Regards,
Madhuri
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
And our CEO's investment power is not as good as this new investor's, which is why the new investor, who was actually brought in by another director, is now in. Our CEO has already informed the other director that it is challenging to work with this new investor, but due to unavoidable circumstances, he is collaborating with the new investor. Our CEO is young, has good knowledge, is always enthusiastic about new technologies, and in some meetings, he has mentioned that our team is his strength.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
Working with communities.ppt
EPFO MEMBERS BOOKLET.pdf