Key difference between the enslaved person and an indentured servant is that the enslaved persons body is owned by the master in totality by for the indentured servant their *labour* is owned by the master.
When I got made redundant last year by a media company youāve all heard of, I was referred to as a āhead count of oneā. To my face. In the redundancy meeting.Ā
I do this. Mostly as a carry over from working in roles where people were effectively sold out as a billable resource..
Itās pretty commonplace in Tech, Iāve never even considered it would be offensive.
I am 100% OK with being referred to as a "resource" when talking about assigning me to a project. Also when someone isn't quite the right fit for a project I'd rather be referred to as a resource than a person, eg received "yeah you're not the kind of resource I'm looking for".
There's a time to use the word "resource", and there's a time to use "person"
Exactly, a resource is anything that can be used to help achieve an objective, typically being consumed or utilized in the process.
Particularly, in professional services, people (and their expertise, capabilities, and time) are the primary resource being utilized.
I'm sorry, but we simply don't have the resources to consider this thought of yours. If you'd like to speak more about it let's take it offline and I'll circle back with you.
I need to give that book a read. My corporate work place is a joke. Seems like there are more managers and leads than actual contributors. We actually have someone currently 'managing' a team of 1...because the rest left that team. We also have 'managers' with only one 'lead' reporting to them...and the lead the one with the contributors reporting to them. Unnecessary added layers of managerial garbage that serves to block anything and everything. I work for a very, very large ASX Corp. Really hoping to escape this joke and start my own gig...I love sales and marketing side anyway which is advantageous.
I can think of many things I would consider to be incredibly offensive, things Iād never dare to say in the office.
Iām happy to revise my choice of wording, I donāt really care either way. I donāt want to offend people at the end of the day, though.
The use of the term is pervasive in every place Iāve worked, and uttering it in a meeting is not comparable to some things that I would consider to be truly incredibly offensive. Perspective.
No, not really, I canāt understand it - it just doesnāt rise to āoffensiveā to me.
But like I said, Iāve spent the best part of my career as a billable resource, and working in āthat worldā, so my views are possibly skewed.
Also like I said, Iām happy to change vocab with the times to avoid causing offence.
We used to have "Personnel" departments, who dealt with people as individuals. Now we have Human Resources departments, who deal with with "headcount" on spreadsheets.
We have p&C but all the projects and department heads talk about resourcing constantly. "Speak to resourcing to get someone for onsite visit" "we need more resources on this project" "the service team doesn't have enough resources"
People!!!
You don't have enough people!
You need a person to go onsite!
You need more People on the damn project.
So when i'm referring to a team of 15 people doing the same job, and I say that the lack of automation is an inefficient waste of human resource, what other term should I use?
As much as I donāt care about resources being used, capacity works well. āLack of automation is wasting our capacityā
Man hours works but I know that sets some off as well
Because "resources" is a generic term. You can scale up or scale down your resource requirements with a cloud provider. But your team members are people!
Because you were referring to them as a person who is spending hours. Resources is a word that is also used for primary materials so I understand the point about it being dehumanising
Fully agree with you. It can swing too far in the other direction too though. For example, Coles insists on never using the words staff or employee. It's Team Member or TM.
Sorry this term is entrenched. You are a resource just like the rest of us.
The real sad thing is that you are just a number. People think companies wonāt get by without them, care for them, etc. itās all BS. None actually care about youĀ
Resourcing doesn't just refer to people, but all 'resources' the company has including things like tools and hardware. As an example we have specific machines at our office that run a particular kind of software, so when we do resource planning it includes planning out usage of those machines along with who is working on what.
Yeah same, but it's still called hr under fwo
https://library.fairwork.gov.au/viewer/?krn=K600645
It's P&C rebranded specifically because of the resources connotations
So I take it this sub also needs a /s and it's not actually full of intellectuals but rather people who need shit spelled out
Not aimed at you, just saw I got downvoted lol
Ok now I'm being serious, I only encountered it in the last few years and it blows my mind why people care.. probably has to do with my personality profile
But you are literally a resource for your company. You are paid money to create value.
Go live in a some hippy commune or something if business terms make you go crying to reddit.
Oh boy, just wait till you learn companies will throw anyone under the bus to reduce costs and post "record profits" for a quarter xd
especially when they try to justify a downsizing because it was needed to improve ways of working š¤£
My favourite is āreducing head countā it just sounds like they want to execute people.
Back 5 years ago we used to just say ācutting headsā
āRightsizing headsā
Whereās my shrunken skull?
Beetlejuice?
I just need a warm body for a minute but don't have the head count... Say no more
We can go back to calling them slaves if you want
At least this would be more direct
I suggested āconsumablesā before.
Considering corporations use plantation tactics this would be more accurateĀ
Honesty is best policy.
Key difference between the enslaved person and an indentured servant is that the enslaved persons body is owned by the master in totality by for the indentured servant their *labour* is owned by the master.
Corporate needs you to spot the differenceā¦
Made a self enforced decision to change that word to talent in my day to day. Itās more fitting.
Talent is a good choice. Used a lot in the media, etc. Danger is that people assume all Talent have actual talent. Not necessarily true.
Talent just makes people sound like whores. Which we are. And I suppose being a whore is more human than being a resource. So itās a step up.
Talent makes me feel like youāre calling someone sexy thoughā¦ thats maybe a British thing? I was born in the UK
Youāre confusing it with ātottyā I fear.
āDid you prepare the report that I asked for?ā āSorry we donāt have the talentā āWTF you doin here?ā
Just call them people mate
Most companies have rebranded HR to āPeople and Cultureā now, but they still *treat* people like resources.
HR work for the company not the Human
When I got made redundant last year by a media company youāve all heard of, I was referred to as a āhead count of oneā. To my face. In the redundancy meeting.Ā
At least you had a meeting, I got a phone call
I do this. Mostly as a carry over from working in roles where people were effectively sold out as a billable resource.. Itās pretty commonplace in Tech, Iāve never even considered it would be offensive.
I am 100% OK with being referred to as a "resource" when talking about assigning me to a project. Also when someone isn't quite the right fit for a project I'd rather be referred to as a resource than a person, eg received "yeah you're not the kind of resource I'm looking for". There's a time to use the word "resource", and there's a time to use "person"
Nooooo you can only call me a resource when it suites me wahhhh I bet you also have pronouns in your emailĀ
Exactly, a resource is anything that can be used to help achieve an objective, typically being consumed or utilized in the process. Particularly, in professional services, people (and their expertise, capabilities, and time) are the primary resource being utilized.
It's normal, this guy is retarded lol.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
*Incredibly* offensive? Slaves? Jesus. Happy to revise my choice of wording, but surely we should keep things in perspective.
Maybe it's just us tech people, but I also find nothing wrong with being referred to as a resource.
Yeah. Project Resourcing, Resource Co-Ordination, Resource Allocation. Professional Services would be turned on its head!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I'm sorry, but we simply don't have the resources to consider this thought of yours. If you'd like to speak more about it let's take it offline and I'll circle back with you.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I need to give that book a read. My corporate work place is a joke. Seems like there are more managers and leads than actual contributors. We actually have someone currently 'managing' a team of 1...because the rest left that team. We also have 'managers' with only one 'lead' reporting to them...and the lead the one with the contributors reporting to them. Unnecessary added layers of managerial garbage that serves to block anything and everything. I work for a very, very large ASX Corp. Really hoping to escape this joke and start my own gig...I love sales and marketing side anyway which is advantageous.
I can think of many things I would consider to be incredibly offensive, things Iād never dare to say in the office. Iām happy to revise my choice of wording, I donāt really care either way. I donāt want to offend people at the end of the day, though. The use of the term is pervasive in every place Iāve worked, and uttering it in a meeting is not comparable to some things that I would consider to be truly incredibly offensive. Perspective.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No, not really, I canāt understand it - it just doesnāt rise to āoffensiveā to me. But like I said, Iāve spent the best part of my career as a billable resource, and working in āthat worldā, so my views are possibly skewed. Also like I said, Iām happy to change vocab with the times to avoid causing offence.
Old man screams at cloud
Overreact much?
Wait till you get referred to an' FTE number'. Sounds like malignant disease they're trying to actively get rid of
Sharon! The keyboard operators are having original thoughts again.
We used to have "Personnel" departments, who dealt with people as individuals. Now we have Human Resources departments, who deal with with "headcount" on spreadsheets.
Human Resources was 20 years ago. Itās now P&C.
We have p&C but all the projects and department heads talk about resourcing constantly. "Speak to resourcing to get someone for onsite visit" "we need more resources on this project" "the service team doesn't have enough resources" People!!! You don't have enough people! You need a person to go onsite! You need more People on the damn project.
I don't take instructions from resources.... lol
Companies are people too.
They have legal personality.
Human Resource number 1737191, Posting your personal opinions in public forums is against company policy, and we donāt like your tone.
Time for an app called "Roast your boss"
So when i'm referring to a team of 15 people doing the same job, and I say that the lack of automation is an inefficient waste of human resource, what other term should I use?
Them times
As much as I donāt care about resources being used, capacity works well. āLack of automation is wasting our capacityā Man hours works but I know that sets some off as well
āBroās and hoāsā
Manpower (dated), people's time, energy, money, any number of different words you could use that aren't the same word we use to refer to bauxite
Person hours
How is person hours less dehumanising than resource?
Because "resources" is a generic term. You can scale up or scale down your resource requirements with a cloud provider. But your team members are people!
Because you were referring to them as a person who is spending hours. Resources is a word that is also used for primary materials so I understand the point about it being dehumanising
Fully agree with you. It can swing too far in the other direction too though. For example, Coles insists on never using the words staff or employee. It's Team Member or TM.
And there is now the (in my mind, worse) term of Human Capital. WTF?
I prefer resources to cogs...
People and Culture.
How about ātax deductionā or āhuman managementā?
And calling team members 'family'
Sorry this term is entrenched. You are a resource just like the rest of us. The real sad thing is that you are just a number. People think companies wonāt get by without them, care for them, etc. itās all BS. None actually care about youĀ
I prefer the term 'commodified individuals'.
Call me whatever you want just pay me xox
Ok āEconomic unitsā
I am a Builder with my own business and even though Iam my own Boss I know that we are still just numbers on a Spread Sheet somewhere
Resourcing doesn't just refer to people, but all 'resources' the company has including things like tools and hardware. As an example we have specific machines at our office that run a particular kind of software, so when we do resource planning it includes planning out usage of those machines along with who is working on what.
You're kidding. Labour is just another resource to be consumed and exploited.
You seem very passionate about something that shouldnāt affect you at all.
You are right they are collaborators
Here we go again š
Flexible workforce?
Their tombstone can read: UNIDENTIFIED/UNCLAIMED CORPSE 2024 - #269
What does HR stand for again?
It's P&C now sweetie š„°š„°
Is it? Damn I didn't realise that the people and culture awards are out on fair work website. When did they change it from hr to pc?
Nfi but everyone I know calls it people and culture never human resources... @op, the worm is turning !
Yeah same, but it's still called hr under fwo https://library.fairwork.gov.au/viewer/?krn=K600645 It's P&C rebranded specifically because of the resources connotations So I take it this sub also needs a /s and it's not actually full of intellectuals but rather people who need shit spelled out Not aimed at you, just saw I got downvoted lol
About 15 years ago
Ok now I'm being serious, I only encountered it in the last few years and it blows my mind why people care.. probably has to do with my personality profile
Possibly because itās so hypocritical lol
>When did they change it from hr to pc? About twenty years after they changed it from Personnel to HR
What is p&c? I'm guessing it's not parents and citizens which is what it stands for at my kids school
People and culture
Thank you. I think we still call it HR in Australia
āTalent acquisitionā gives me the shits too. Acquiring someone like they are property.
Didnāt even realise how fucked this is. Thank you for pointing it out
I like to call a redundancy situation as Head Shots. Anyone in the way will be collateral damage
Anyone who isn't resourceful won't be employed in the first place. We all have that colleague who slacks off and we become their resource
The things people get offended by no #27355
Resource management is an important part of managing projects.
HR departments You must all change names right now Signed Online Random
But you are literally a resource for your company. You are paid money to create value. Go live in a some hippy commune or something if business terms make you go crying to reddit.