Two Tech CEOs Wanted Every Worker to Have a Permanent, Publicly-Available Job Performance File (vice.com) 153
"Two CEOs on a podcast casually proposed a shareable database of worker performance that would follow them between companies, forever, and encouraged listeners to create one," writes Slashdot reader merauder128 , summarizing a recent article on Vice.
"HR professionals say it's a terrible idea."
Vice points out the podcast both the host and guest were CEOs of "data harvesters that package and resell data to other parties." Through one lens, it was a mundane musing between two CEOs of data companies talking about how awesome it would be to have more data on something. But in the context of experiments occurring in the tech industry around hiring practices, it was two influential CEOs encouraging other entrepreneurs to create a business that would be an absolute nightmare for workers, a type of credit score for workers that could be a permanent HR file that follows workers from one job to the next, and where a worker who struggles at one job may have trouble getting another....
It is also in line with a growing trend among tech companies that, spurred by work-from-home and hybrid work, are increasingly interested in quantifying employee performance. The most prominent example is Coinbase introducing an app so employees can constantly rate each other's performances, a scenario even the normally cheery TechCrunch said "sounds rough."
Over the last several years, there has been a boom in employee management software solutions such as Workday, Lattice, CultureAmp that are used across thousands of companies for performance reviews and other sensitive HR tasks. Technologically speaking, what Youakim and Hoffman are talking about is opening those confidential resources — or some condensed version of them that can be easily digested and analyzed — up to everyone.
None of these HR software companies have indicated that they have any intention of doing this.
The article warns that experts who have studied hiring extensively believe a permanent database database "would allow this complete, random mess to follow workers their entire careers, affecting their job prospects, earning potential, and their broader lives." And the article summarizes a reaction to the idea from John Hausknecht, a professor of human resources at Cornell University. "It assumes people don't change, that jobs require similar attributes, that a person's experience at one company is relevant to another where they will be in a different environment with a different manager and different company culture....
"Or, to put it a different way, 'Just because we can track it, collect it, and ask about it,' Hausknecht said, 'doesn't necessarily mean we should.'"
"HR professionals say it's a terrible idea."
Vice points out the podcast both the host and guest were CEOs of "data harvesters that package and resell data to other parties." Through one lens, it was a mundane musing between two CEOs of data companies talking about how awesome it would be to have more data on something. But in the context of experiments occurring in the tech industry around hiring practices, it was two influential CEOs encouraging other entrepreneurs to create a business that would be an absolute nightmare for workers, a type of credit score for workers that could be a permanent HR file that follows workers from one job to the next, and where a worker who struggles at one job may have trouble getting another....
It is also in line with a growing trend among tech companies that, spurred by work-from-home and hybrid work, are increasingly interested in quantifying employee performance. The most prominent example is Coinbase introducing an app so employees can constantly rate each other's performances, a scenario even the normally cheery TechCrunch said "sounds rough."
Over the last several years, there has been a boom in employee management software solutions such as Workday, Lattice, CultureAmp that are used across thousands of companies for performance reviews and other sensitive HR tasks. Technologically speaking, what Youakim and Hoffman are talking about is opening those confidential resources — or some condensed version of them that can be easily digested and analyzed — up to everyone.
None of these HR software companies have indicated that they have any intention of doing this.
The article warns that experts who have studied hiring extensively believe a permanent database database "would allow this complete, random mess to follow workers their entire careers, affecting their job prospects, earning potential, and their broader lives." And the article summarizes a reaction to the idea from John Hausknecht, a professor of human resources at Cornell University. "It assumes people don't change, that jobs require similar attributes, that a person's experience at one company is relevant to another where they will be in a different environment with a different manager and different company culture....
"Or, to put it a different way, 'Just because we can track it, collect it, and ask about it,' Hausknecht said, 'doesn't necessarily mean we should.'"
Recipe for a total disaster. (Score:5, Insightful)
We all know that no job is ever the same, and no work environment is either.
I've worked for both horrible bosses and good bosses. As if it wasn't enough that a large percentage lie on their resumé - a public performance profile can lead to total disaster for potential jobseekers as they might be judged forever by a rogue boss with personal issues.
Besides, there are jobs we take because we have to and don't necessarily enjoy, and there are jobs we truly want but don't always get. This entire suggestion (if it came to fruition) would end up as a total shitshow with fake praise, workers overcompensating for likes and raving reviews, bosses with a grudge now capable of destroying someones career that could otherwise be excellent for a certain type of job, but came from a job he/she didn't thrive in.
No, no and utterly no!
Re: Recipe for a total disaster. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Bad for other reasons too, abusive employees might blackmail old employers to give them a good reference âoeor elseâ. Since they really have nothing to gain by being honest it wouldnâ(TM)t take much of a threat.
My guess is that data would wind up being X worked here from xx to yy. Anything else would be open to question and interpretation, and wind up being litigated. And it's not just by employees, but if an employer leaves out info that is damaging another company may well sue over the omission. The HR types I knew would only verify employment dates to avoid suits by former employees or companies that hired them.
Re: Recipe for a total disaster. (Score:4, Insightful)
Devil's advocate (Score:2)
This could also mean employees would have a database on employers (Freudian slip- it first came out as exploiters) that couldn't be concealed through shell companies and the like. Also business relationships would be exposed, making instances of cronyism more apparent.
While not in favor of social credit scores, the most apparent problem is who wields them. The presumption is that they would be enforced on the plebes, but I think they would be far more damaging to the power brokers.
Re: (Score:3)
Good idea, but there are sites like Glassdoor that show employee ratings of employers.
Re: (Score:1)
We also know that some former employees were fired because they were incompetent. Making sure that they don't get another job in IT because they aren't actually qualified would be a good thing.
Re: Recipe for a total disaster. (Score:5, Interesting)
Sure but this would create two major issues.
1. Someone could be good in IT and working miracles but their boss doesn't understand the problems or environment and marks them as failing to meet his unrealistic expectations.
2. Someone could be bad in IT but get better later, but be unemployable from one bad review years ago. While mediocre people never get bad reviews.
Re: Recipe for a total disaster. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Recipe for a total disaster. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
6. A permanent job performance file opens the door for paid Job Performance Optimization.
Search Engine Optimization is bad enough. With a permanent job performance file I can see it getting gamed with paid for Job Performance Optimization.
Re:Recipe for a total disaster. (Score:4)
Do these CEOs not realize that a significant proportion of the managers in their companies are backstabbing sociopaths who would not hesitate for a moment to ruin someone else's career for a small advantage?
The big problems with this idea are that:
1. Performance reviews are highly subjective and often highly biased.
2. Performance of a junior is often poor because the junior's supervisor only knows how to demotivate.
3. Etc..
Re: (Score:2)
The negative consequences of this form a minor plot point in Charlie Stross's recent novel "Quantum of Nightmares". (He has also previously referenced Slashdot, as well as The Register, the BOFH and the Scary Devil Monastery in his earlier novels).
Re: (Score:3)
So wouldn't the workers have a database of bosses and managers in the same manner? Sounds like that might be something to look into regardless!
Re:Recipe for a total disaster. (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is, and always will be, the power imbalance between the employer and employee. As long as employer has power, the employees always suffer. A database like this, which not coincidentally is being proposed by data brokers, only serves to empower the employer.
Of course, the CEOs are for it, and not because they're immune, they're CEOs of data brokers who make tons of money buying and selling data on people. Of course they want everyone to have what is effectively a permanent record, because that's more data to buy and sell and make money from.
If you want to know why it's bad, consider the most common data broker you'll encounter in your life - the credit bureau. Despite years of being in the business and laws all about it, they still can't get it right and your credit history file ends up with lots of errors and mistakes.
So you think these permanent records are going to be any better? If the credit bureaus can't get it right, what makes you think other data brokers can?
And finally, it's almost never the company that's bad, it's almost always some manager - people generally quit their jobs over bad managers, not bad jobs. And chances are, these data brokers will not care about things like that, hell, they'll probably make it hard to determine if it's the result of a single bad manager
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to know why it's bad, consider the most common data broker you'll encounter in your life - the credit bureau. Despite years of being in the business and laws all about it, they still can't get it right and your credit history file ends up with lots of errors and mistakes.
Not only that, they also leak your personal information like crazy. Remember the Equifax data breach from a couple of years ago? I just looked it up again myself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Wow. Insider trading before the breach was made public, a pittance in the class action suit (like, less than ten bucks per victim who had their personal and financial information spewed all over the web!) Also a separate malware incident via drive-by download... how the hell are these shitbags still in business?
Yep
Re: (Score:2)
Not health care, not retirement savings, not wage protection. They want a permanent file of worker performance to follow from job to job.
Yes, taxing extreme incomes is currently inadequate and absolutely necessary, and there IS a connection.
Re: (Score:2)
I've worked for both horrible bosses and good bosses. As if it wasn't enough that a large percentage lie on their resumé - a public performance profile can lead to total disaster for potential jobseekers as they might be judged forever by a rogue boss with personal issues.
Also there could be issues from terrible employees that may sue if their poor performances are disclosed. Not that their performance rating was not warranted but that they could tie their former companies in litigation for years. Most companies then just adopt a policy of not disclosing any performance outside the company which would make this idea worthless.
Re: Recipe for a total disaster. (Score:2)
The avenues for abuse of such a system are many. Imagine an employee who is up for performance review and is expecting a raise. The company instead informs the employee that there will be no raise, not even a cost of living adjustment. If the employee has a problem with that or is planning on quitting, wellâ¦it would be really unfortunate if that sterling permanent record had a little accident with a negative review.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice FP, but I look at these things funny. This proposal is for the vast majority of the wage slaves and is just part of their program to push more workers into that category. At the other end (including how they (legends in their own minds) think of themselves) are the superstars who get jobs created to fit their capabilities.
I think the underlying problem is that computer technologies are making it too easy to replicate the work of the true superstars. And I do NOT include these self-glorified bean counte
scum will be scum (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, somebody would still need to host it, maintain it, allow challenges and appeals, etc. I'm sure by suggesting it they are hoping to be the company that gets paid for oversee it.
Also, there are plenty of companies that compile and aggregate public data for a profit. Doing a background check on a new hire? There are companies that offer huge databases of financial-related data about arrests, convictions, bankruptcy filings, divorces, judgements, etc. all from "public sources".
If you think keeping your
Re: (Score:3)
If all you have is a hammer.. (Score:4, Insightful)
2 CEOs in the business of collecting data (without having any clue as to what that data means, that's obviously not their job), want more data collected.
News at 11..
I'm not even going to bother listing all the reasons why this is a really really terrible idea, because that would be a bit of a laundry list.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not even going to bother listing all the reasons why this is a really really terrible idea, because that would be a bit of a laundry list.
Yeah, same here.
Re:If all you have is a hammer.. (Score:4, Funny)
Let's put these two monkeys at the top of their own list and see how it goes.
To quote Jurassic Park (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.
How to quickly be sued out of existence... (Score:5, Interesting)
Wouldn't anything negative in this database be the basis for a defamation or slander lawsuit?
My current employer only provides a start date and end date for employment verification. No performance data, no salary data. Nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
There would be a very large pool of people negatively affected by this who can't afford their rights.
That's why class action lawsuits exist.
Re: How to quickly be sued out of existence... (Score:4, Informative)
You mean suits where others get fucked slightly and your life is beyond repair...Class action suits are good in theory but often don't bankrupt a company as they should to compensate those they screwed...
Re: (Score:2)
That's why class action lawsuits exist.
Yep, the measly 6 or 7 bucks that came out of the Equifax class action suit will really undo the damage for the millions (yes, millions!) of victims. Class actions sound like a good idea, until you do the maths.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't anything negative in this database be the basis for a defamation or slander lawsuit?
Yes, however that is only useful to the minority percentage that can afford legal representation.
I might be out of line saying this, but I dare say the types of jobs and companies that would use these sorts of HR automations often overlap with mainly having job offerings that are low pay and low skill.
There would be a very large pool of people negatively affected by this who can't afford their rights.
Eh, individual damage suits could very well be lucrative enough to take on contingency. I know lawyers who gladly take on a $7000 suit as the money is in numbers. With such a database it's likely to be full employment for personal injury attorneys.
Re: (Score:3)
If they could share HR records (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
No being able to hire anyone could be seen in a positive light. You have to PROVE that the person you're trying to hire can't be found in the US, for H-1B visas. (Or, at least, that's the way it's supposed to be. I'm sure these rules are bent so far.)
Let's collect all information about everyone (Score:2)
"Let's collect all the information we can, about everyone in the US, and post them on publicly available websites! It's genius!" - data aggregator companies.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Leave it to an HR wonk... (Score:5, Insightful)
Forget for the moment the utter evilness of the scheme proposed by the fuckers in the podcast. Consider instead what HR professor (!?) John Hausknecht said:
It assumes people don't change, that jobs require similar attributes, that a person's experience at one company is relevant to another where they will be in a different environment with a different manager and different company culture...
No mention there - not a peep - about the most obvious, most important, irrefutable, number one deal-breaker of an objection to this craziness: the prospect of revenge.
Beyond even the subjectivity of the evaluations, and the potential for simply being wrong, lurk the asshole bosses and co-workers, and the HR power-trippers, who simply want to sabotage some poor schmuck's employment prospects forever. Take that as the first and inevitable downside to this massive brain fart. Then take into account the absolute pillaging of privacy and autonomy. After that - as a mere afterthought - perhaps there's time and room for the good professor's weak, praising-with-faint-damns pseudo-objections to this fascistic train-wreck of an idea.
So the thing you need to understand about HR (Score:5, Insightful)
HR is there to help the company and to protect the company's interests. If you're actively being abused by a coworker they can be useful because the company doesn't want to be sued for allowing that abuse but that's just an instance you're interested in there is aligning.
They're not there to protect you they're there to protect the company.
Re:Leave it to an HR wonk... (Score:5, Insightful)
First, I'm going to point out that this is a partial quote of a longer conversation, which is then summarized in a Vice article. I think it's unfair to conclude that the HR professor didn't make a peep about it. Though I admit I hadn't really thought about HR as being a course you could get a professorship in.
While I agree what you said is a huge problem, I'm going to break rank and say that isn't the #1 problem. The problems boil down to two things.
1. Even if all actors behaved with good intentions and cool rationality, it wouldn't work.
2. Not all actors will engage with good intentions, or rational analysis.
The reason I order them this way, is if #1 weren't true, you could start having conversations about mechanisms to expel bad actors and mitigate #2. After all, we often use reputation systems for all kinds of other things, from Amazon comments & Yelp reviews, Consumer Reports / Better Business Bureau, University rankings, peer-reviewed journals, the bar for legal work, your medical license, etc., and in principle every one of them is subject to the same problem of revenge. And of the things I've listed, you can probably think of examples where revenge was used, (Yelp and Amazon bombing are themselves businesses!). Hell, Slashdot itself operates on a peer-review reputation system that is partially tied to your identity. If you thought there was value, you might look to the mechanisms these other tools have pioneered to see how you could do something similarly self-correcting.
But because of point #1, it's not even worth thinking through whether you could mitigate that attack vector.
Re:Leave it to an HR wonk... (Score:5, Insightful)
Fair points, all taken except for this:
After all, we often use reputation systems for all kinds of other things, from Amazon comments & Yelp reviews, Consumer Reports / Better Business Bureau, University rankings, peer-reviewed journals, the bar for legal work, your medical license, etc., and in principle every one of them is subject to the same problem of revenge.
It seems to me that most if not all of the above assume a fairly large pool of reviews from different and diverse reviewers, which would tend to dilute any purposeful skewing. For HR records that's unlikely to be true unless a candidate has had a really large number of placements, in which case there may be more immediate concerns about his or her suitability.
Re: (Score:2)
No mention there - not a peep - about the most obvious, most important, irrefutable, number one deal-breaker of an objection to this craziness: the prospect of revenge.
Not even revenge. The lopsided power dynamic of the employee-employer relationship is already a big problem (that's why unions were created).
Now the employee also has to suck up to the current employer to improve their future job prospects as well.
What we really need (Score:5, Insightful)
Is a database of people who run companies, who don't publicly condemn such abusive ideas, that will follow those people around wherever they go, to ensure that nobody who is competent in any way will ever work for them.
Think we've got one of those already (Score:3)
This NOT going to look good on (Score:5, Insightful)
your permanent record!
Isn't that what they used to say in elementary school? We were relieved to find out there never was sucha thing, right?
The idea that a couple of CEOs what to make (even as a mused transient thought) makes me seriously question their judgement.
Does every workers job history include (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
the job history of CEOs? Didn't think so.
Of course not, they would all negotiate privacy/non-disclosure clauses in their deals -- or that they would get to write their own records. Of course, many (most?) of the infamous ones, like Carly Fiona, have telling Wikipedia pages, so maybe it would be a wash...
Re: (Score:2)
s/Fiona/Fiorina/ -- damn fat fingers
Re: (Score:2)
No. These rules are for the lower class, not the ruling class. "Do as we say, not as we do."
Re: (Score:2)
It would make it very easy for prospective employees to spot problem companies, and they would then not apply at those locations, and those companies would find it hard to survive.
Sure, just create that global company registry firs
Most writing the reviews shouldn't be allowed to (Score:5, Interesting)
I quit my last job because my boss OVERTLY lied in my review. He botched several projects and blamed the engineers in a desperate attempt to save his hide. Instead of giving vague complaints, he was stupid enough to give specific ones. One complaint about me was about a project I never worked on. He mixed me up with the "other American." Another complaint of his was proveably false and I had an e-mail chain proving it was wrong. I confronted him about both and he did nothing, so I quit that shitshow and found a much better place to work and hate myself for not doing it 2 years sooner. In that situation, he wasn't there when I joined. He should have never been hired. He was fired for incompetence 2 months after I left, partially because of what I exposed to HR. So what happens to any reviews he writes?
So here's the problem. What if he writes lies? What if he writes on my permanent record that I made a whole bunch of mistakes I can easily disprove? Are you going to have a case officer handle my dispute? What if his complaints involve proprietary data or sensitive information? Are we going to open up the actual specifics of my case for a "he said, he said" case? The details for any dispute would be more overwhelming and complex and most actual legal court cases?
The worst part is I am only slightly unlucky. Most of my friends have similar or worse stories. It's rampant in tech. Many managers have no experience or education in dealing with people. They were good programmers who usually got bored of actually writing code and usually sucked at it. Most tech managers are pure garbage. They should have never been in charge of a team, let alone shaping an individual's permanent record.
How are you going to stop people from gaming this system? How are you going to verify the people worked at the places they said they did or that the jobs were real? Most of my past employers are out of business. How can you verify reviews for a company that shut down and you were one of the last employees? It's happened to me half a dozen times (I joined the market in a recession and as a 22yo, didn't know those fancy well-funded startups were about to fold).
As it is, it's hard to verify references. We've caught many Indian candidates overtly lie about their experience and claim to have worked at Indian tech companies that never existed. They assumed our HR dept wouldn't check. I've had buddies beg me to pretend have a role I didn't have and be a fake reference.
So how are you going to prove I was someone's boss and not his peer? How are you going to prove I worked for that company? What are you going to do when one party claims the other's review has falsehoods? I personally would not hesitate to sue the company if they got a single detail incorrect in my "permanent record."
What happens if someone blackmails me after I leave? What happens if a subordinate offers a blowjob for me to write a glowing review?
This is honestly the dumbest idea I've ever heard of. On top of this all, how are you going to make money? It's just upsetting and stupid and makes me wonder what kind of idiot has so
Standards to shove down people's throats (Score:2)
Hey I know. The next time we want standards to shove down people's throats, let's start with a REALLY low bar for HR. Have a standardized job listing. It has to at least contain a definite wage or at least a range of wages. No more of this "hahaha. apply, then we'll tell you. come on, it's a fun game!" (Or, in HR speak: "depends on experience!")
Good news (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Please put a note in his file with the details.
Data pimps want more data to pimp (Score:2)
Management First (Score:2)
Let's track managers first. People can provide important details about their management style, .e.g "takes credit for other people's hard work", or "sets unreasonable deadlines", and the ever popular, "lies about pay raises and bonuses".
just wait for them to list an labor law in that re (Score:2)
just wait for them to list an labor law in that record!
Jay I see you where good at 60K for years now bay (Score:2)
Jay I see you where good at 60K for years in the cheap small town now I want to pay you the same to work in the bay area.
Re: Jay I see you where good at 60K for years now (Score:2)
Most jobs already require disclosing your previous employment and compensation.
Re: (Score:2)
Require compensation disclosure? They can ask me but I’m going to lie for a better paycheck at the new position.
and we want an union like NBA, NHL, NFL, M players (Score:2)
and we want an union like NBA, NHL, NFL, MLB players with the same kind of Performance stats on file.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe with the difference that their performance already IS pretty much public knowledge because their performance actually IS the product they're selling...
In other news... (Score:3)
The Communist Chinese government and their "Social Credit Score" team thinks this is an absolutely FABULOUS idea.
Law breaking employers or psycho employers (Score:3)
While working at Microsystems Software as a software engineer, I was diagnosed with tendonitis on the job. The management there hey started building a file on me (including monitoring my home internet communications) to justifying terminating me when I took time of to get medical treatment recommended by multiple doctors. However, after litigation, I received a judgment of $125,000 when my salary was $44,000/year, when I was out of work for 7 months. (Under MGL 151b -- Mass. version of ADA, FMLA, fraud, breach of contract, and workers compensation law violations) . Now, if an future employer uses (or even looks at this) this information, could the future employer be half liable for retaliation, or discriminations for a perceived disability? This would open up a real can of worms and would ensure full employment for labor lawyers for the foreseeable future.
Later I worked for a psycho, Barry J. Lewis. He was actually convicted or harassing me after I stopped working for free (the check was in the mail, etc.) He was actually screaming at the court staff after he was charged., from what I heard, he would make a Karen seem level headed, understanding, helpful, and sweet. Would it be a good thing for potential employers to listen to nut cases like him without finding out what type of nutcase they are listening to?
Re: (Score:2)
Not so. There are many definitions of disability.
Disability in Social Security Disability means you can't do any work.
Disability for the ADA means that you can't do some of life activities without accommodation, ie. diabetes w/o taking insulin.
There are others, but these are the two majors.
I'm cool with that (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just make CEOs personally liable for their blunders and that problem takes care of itself pretty fucking quickly.
One deadbeat f***tard and .... (Score:2)
And the employee will never know what's in it. (Score:2)
I'll bet that a part of their plan is that the employee will never see the contents of that permanent file.
A second thought is, why not put all that in the person's credit report? Then you would really have some useful info. We could trust Equifax to keep it safe.
No accounting for corruption or retaliation? (Score:2)
My god, this is a horrible idea. Ever been in the kind of company where a top-notch HR director quits over openly voiced "ethical concerns"?
I was. My work was key to the company's success, and yet I got trashed by novice mid-managers and people who slept their way to the top. These were corrupt liars. A few decent people got out of there while they could, and they've been some of my most reliable references.
But can you imagine what crooks would do with this kind of database? I hasten to add, the abilit
Permanent Record? (Score:2)
...a record that will follow you throughout the rest of your life. [youtube.com]
Let's start with CEOs (Score:2)
While we're at it, since the data will be made public, hiring decisions should also be made public, and subject to scientific scrutiny. You claim that you can interpret the data reproducibly? Prove it. And if you can't prove it, then you should be banned from making hiring decisions.
Not a new idea (Score:2)
We had that over here a while ago [wikipedia.org].
Other ideas for permanent Records (Score:2)
It's a fun game.
workers should not unionize says Slashdot. (Score:2)
But let the employers join forces against the workers.
No objective overall job performance (Score:3)
These problems show up even with the "universal" credit scores. For example, if you own your home, cars, etc and make no payments to anyone - you end up with no credit history, and all automated approval systems decline you. I could see the same problem with a job performance database if someone was self employed. They would have no job history, or worse, self employed folks could report themselves as stellar employees all the time. Either way, the database is useless to future employer.
No different from established practice (Score:2)
Most places already have quarterly reviews when you rate your manager and your peers, and in any specialized line of work everybody knows everybody so people quickly know if you were a bad performer.
Who gets to edit it? (Score:2)
Linkedin? (Score:2)
As long as we get to add info UPWARDS (Score:2)
Evaluations and records should include input from below if this is going to work ;)
Backwards problems (Score:2)
"It assumes people don't change..."
That's not the problem. The problem is that people don't know that people change.
Having software that "measures" something that changes isn't a problem. Quite frankly, it's a would-be solution to scenario at-hand.
The issue is that we've never taught people -- in this case, employers -- to accept the measurements as past-values and not (necessarily) current values.
Alas, we've long-ago stopped teaching people to consider the present above the past; and we never taught peopl
Bah (Score:2)
Data harvesting and reselling should be illegal.
And Here's What I Want... (Score:2)
...for every CEO to Have a Permanent, Publicly-Available Financial Disclosure.
Why I don't... (Score:2)
1. It's the manager's job.
2. I don't get paid to rate other employees.
3. I don't want to f**k up another employees career/job.
4. It's not my business.
5. I don't care.
It would be better to get rid of lazy-assed managers who don't do their own jobs, particularly reviewing their employees; who don't motivate their employees; and who don't care.
I refuse to do a manager's job, or any part of it, without a manager's pay!
And I have actually refused to review other employees and to d
Sure . . . (Score:3)
I wager it'd be REAL interesting conversation during one of those "amicable agreements" where we traditionally pay bad CEOs to leave . . . there's gonna be a swimming pool of money for sick leave and child/elder care, huh?
Banks already tried this - and it worked out badly (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Companies wouldn't like this (Score:3)
Companies wouldn't like this because it would have to share too much internal info. Every performance review I've received talks about successes and failures on specific projects. How I built something needed, or saved money fixing a process, purchased and implemented a new solution, etc. I doubt my (or any) company would want their competitors seeing every project and goal and their incremental outcomes. Would they want to share or be legally allowed to disclose that you negotiated a 30% discount from company X? No.
That's why this will never happed. Don't worry about your personal data, companies don't want THEIR data shared with the world.
Illegal, I believe (Score:2)
It's been over 20 years that if a company called to check on someone's resume that they worked there, all HR was allowed to say was "yes, they worked here". They're not allowed to say *anything* more, from "we'd love to hire them back" to "they were terrible and fired". They *can't* say any of that.
Of course, I don't see these assholes suggesting that all execs have a publicly accessible file like that....
Re: (Score:2)
It's been over 20 years that if a company called to check on someone's resume that they worked there, all HR was allowed to say was "yes, they worked here". They're not allowed to say *anything* more, from "we'd love to hire them back" to "they were terrible and fired". They *can't* say any of that.
Of course, I don't see these assholes suggesting that all execs have a publicly accessible file like that....
I think they're legally *allowed* to say more than that, it's just that companies don't want to get sued, so they have their own policies forbidding anything more.
Good luck with that... (Score:2)
There's a reason why most previous employers refuse to say anything about former employees other than "yes they worked from date1 to date2."
Any service like this would get sued out of existence in milliseconds, and possibly any employers that contributed data, also.
We have a cautionary tale about this (Score:2)
Marshall Brain wrote Manna (https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 ) in 2003. Sadly, we may not even have twenty years between the warning of dystopia and its arrival.
Agent (Score:2)
We have one already... (Score:2)
...It's called a LinkedIn Pro-File. We create it and make it public (or semi-public). We list all our roles and schooling. Our peers and bosses sometimes comment on our performance (with recommendations).
This file hardly ever says anything negative about us.
debug it on managers first (Score:2)
All workers want a performance record of employers (Score:2)
Tech workers want a performance record of all employers.
Bad employers need to be called out and avoided.
They won't last long.
Re: (Score:2)
The hiring manager can certainly try, but if your previous manager says anything he is most likely going against policy and giving an opening for litigation (most companies I worked for explicitly say such request should be transferred to HR). Not saying this doesn't happen, but the previous manager/company has no incentive to give information and all incentive not to say anything other than 'yes, he/she worked here from X to Y as Z'.
One common exception is hiring new Ph.D. science types. I would call their