|
Post by vivaveritas on Dec 2, 2014 15:51:28 GMT -5
I have yet to meet an employee—staff or faculty—who is happy with what seems to be Harvard’s cultural shift from an academic model, emphasizing openness, collegiality and caring, to a corporate one that focuses on the financial bottom line at whatever cost to community.
I have, however, met many who are frightened to speak up.
Despite Harvard dismantling the Longer-Service Employee Recognition program, its error in handling the supplemental life insurance matter, and most recently the introduction of a health-care benefits package that asks employees to weigh their well-being against their wallets (to name just three), most of us remain loyal to Harvard. Most us don’t just work for Harvard; we feel we ARE Harvard, and so it's especially painful when we -- the people who make Harvard a leader in education and research -- are treated so dismissively and cavalierly by an emerging corporate autocracy.
We are also upset by the climate of fear that has grown on our campus now that our tradition of open back-and-forth seems to be violated every day. This has created a campus of silent employees, many who no longer focus on doing their best for the school but simply on keeping their jobs.
But this is not who we are. This is not why we chose to work at Harvard. It’s time to speak up and take back Harvard. First step: Register on this website and complete the poll “What is your view on Harvard’s health plan changes for 2015?” Then get three other co-workers to do the same.
If we really are Harvard, it's up to us to fix this.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Dec 2, 2014 19:32:58 GMT -5
Bravo VV! It is pretty surprising how deeply demotivating the current administrative culture has become. Rather than a persistent impulse to constantly improve what we do, and how we do it, it has now become, all too often, a matter of managing what gets worse and what no longer gets done at all. Absolutely numbing. Millions of dollars of new systems and countless hours of new procedures, policies, and controls and this is where we end up?! I am hard pressed to call to mind an example of inspirational or motivational administrative leadership at any point in our recent past. Perhaps making this better starts with ourselves, every day in everything we do (or at least what's left of what we are able to do!).
|
|
|
Post by unwell on Dec 2, 2014 21:56:02 GMT -5
I can't imagine the people in on this decision were happy about it either. I too have not met very many people who are left with no impact to this change. I think we all look at it as a pay cut or at least a diminishing to what it means to be a Harvard employee. For some reason those that are OK with this are willing to stick to the party line rather than do what's right. What's scares me is they are the same people that say they are our support. This is eye opening for sure and makes me question a number of other new initiatives the University has brought forward.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 2, 2014 22:14:16 GMT -5
I think many people are afraid or they don't know that can speak up. Here's your chance. Let us know how the recent changes will affect you or others you work with.
|
|
Silence is not golden
Guest
|
Post by Silence is not golden on Dec 3, 2014 10:42:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by guest on Dec 4, 2014 9:27:03 GMT -5
I hate to show my ignorance, but I was unaware of a dismantling of Harvard's longer service employee recognition program. Can you provide more information about that?
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Dec 4, 2014 12:26:31 GMT -5
There is still a recognition of longer service employees in the form of a gift but the reception and public recognition of such employees was discontinued. The Crimson covered this in March (http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2014/3/13/harvard-cancels-ceremony/). The odd thing about this is the motivation for doing so. The reception could not have been a particularly costly affair so it is hard to imagine that there was a financial motivation. I suspect it was more of a subtle devaluation of long term service as a cultural and community value. I believe that most corporations discontinued such recognition years ago.
|
|
|
Post by I_Am_A_Man on Dec 4, 2014 18:59:10 GMT -5
Thanks Silence is Not Golden that was an interesting piece. I woukd be curious to know what came of the author's research into "upward voice" in the service sector. The New York Times apparently moved Starbucks off a very family-unfriendly scheduling policy for its baristas, after an NYT article described how difficult it was for a working mother to deal with constantly changing schedules. But who is going to write an expose of Harvard and its race to mediocrity in how it treats its managers? #firstworldproblems? All I know is that this benefit change represents a pay cut after 20 years of service. Tufts/Wellesley/Babson, here I come.
|
|
Silence is not golden
Guest
|
Post by Silence is not golden on Dec 4, 2014 19:20:27 GMT -5
Indeed, any expectation of sympathy, empathy, or even understanding from the "outside world" is highly unlikely. Antipathy toward HU runs deep in some circles! And losing good employees (as I expect you are) is the first direct casualty of these type of changes. Unfortunately, there is a component of administration who does not see this as a problem. I distinctly recall being in a large meeting of administrators shortly after the onset of the financial crisis when a senior administrator (now departed for a southern competitor) referred to the need to occasionally "burn out the underbrush" in referring to staff. It was the first expression of that nature that I heard at Harvard but was certainly not the last.
|
|