Conference 7.286::digital

re: .0

>	Exercise: Take any job posted in VTX "JOBS_US". Find the recruiter's
>		   name and phone number. Now try to call this person.

About a year ago, I was told that, if the recruiter has not gotten back to
you in one week, then the recruiter's admin support is required to release
to you the name of the hiring manager.  This procedure was supposed to have
"fixed" this problem.

Of course, a common answer to inquiries was "We've received your resume,
and we'll call you if we're interested," typically on the fifth business
day. 

Also, depending on the recruiter, you may have varying degrees of luck 
getting through to the admin support at all.

Ray

    	Did you try calling between 10:00 - 11:00, 2:00 - 3:00 EDT? From my
    experience, these seem to be the working hours where I've been
    successful at finding someone.

    Well folks, I sent a note to an HR person yesterday, and I received a 
    courteous reply in less than 18 hours.  

    	Send H.R. correspondence via A1 if possible, with READ RECEIPT 
    selected. File original and Read Receipt (if received ;-) ) in
    Litigation Folder and back up the files.
    
    	Use your imagination for the next step. Of course, the downside is
    the de-personalized addresses set up- "Send your H.R. questions to
    WECARE @mumble"...
    
    Phil

>    	Send H.R. correspondence via A1 if possible, with READ RECEIPT 
>    selected.

  Does All-in-1	mail have a facility to automatically notify the sender when 
mail is read? If so, then All-in-1 is indeed the method of choice.
  A lot of hiring managers post job openings in WARIOR::JOBS, which mostly 
takes Personnel out of the loop until someone actually has an interview. 
Playing telephone tag doesn't make sense if you can use electronic mail, but
if people don't answer electronic mail either, then you are SOL.

  >Does All-in-1	mail have a facility to automatically notify the sender when 
>mail is read? If so, then All-in-1 is indeed the method of choice.

    i dont know about ALL-in-1, but i bet you five dunketts donuts there
    is no way that all-in-1 does that, and iam putting my nick on the line
    right now by saying this without checking it out first because this 
    will mean the mail software will have to do so much more that it already 
    does and this would make it a bulky and complicated and confusing 
    to the  user and this is something we would not have allowed to start
    with.

    \nasser

    re: .7, .8
    
    Yes it does have this capability.  The user can also turn it off:-(
    
    Bob

    RE: .7-
    
>  Does All-in-1 mail have a facility to automatically notify the sender when 
>mail is read? If so, then All-in-1 is indeed the method of choice.
    
    	Yes. TAB through the normal To:, CC: Subj: etc. fields and you will
    come to a second screen where you can select READ_RECEIPT and also
    DELIVERY_RECEIPT. You can also use EXPRESS send to bypass the normal
    queued tranmission of the message.
    
    Phil

RE: .10

>>  Does All-in-1 mail have a facility to automatically notify the sender when 
                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>mail is read? If so, then All-in-1 is indeed the method of choice.
    
>    	Yes. TAB through the normal To:, CC: Subj: etc. fields and you will
>    come to a second screen where you can select READ_RECEIPT and also
>    DELIVERY_RECEIPT. You can also use EXPRESS send to bypass the normal
>    queued tranmission of the message.
    


The Read Receipt isn't "automatic".  The recipient has the option of sending
the Read Receipt or not.   

	re .5:

>    File original and Read Receipt (if received ;-) ) in
>    Litigation Folder and back up the files.

	Of course the Litigation Folder won't do you much good if your
	account gets suspended before you are notified you are an ex-DECcie.

	Perhaps you could keep the backup TK50 at home, so you can restore
	the files onto your personal VAXstation. But there's a hitch there
	too - those files are the property of Digital. Hmmm.

	/Tom

    BTW, I'm surprised the ALL-IN-1 trademark police haven't showed up
    yet...
    
    It's ALL-IN-1, (all caps)....
    
    Keith R>

A user of a mail system which supports read receipts (ALL-IN-1 or DEC 
MAILworks, but not VMSmail) can send a message and request a read receipt. 
The receiving mail system (if capable) will send back a read receipt when the 
user reads the message. A delivery receipt is also available. ALL-IN-1 and 
MAILworks can do this, VMSmail can't.

For ALL-IN-1, at least, the system manager can set up an individual 
user's account so that the user is prompted before a read receipt is sent. 
So, if the user doesn't want a receipt sent, ALL-IN-1 doesn't send it. If the 
account isn't set up this way, ALL-IN-1 sends the receipt without prompting 
the user.

The bottom line in all of this is that while you can request a read receipt, 
not getting one back doesn't mean your message wasn't read. If you do get one 
you can be sure your message was read. Many people feel this is 
an invasion of personal privacy. Many mail system customers 
absolutely insist on having the capability.

Unfortunately, we haven't yet been able to make ALL-IN-1 generate "read and 
taken seriously" receipts. :-)

All this makes the underlying mail system more complex, but the user 
interface, which was carefully designed for non-computer-literate users, 
reduces requesting a read receipt to a simple form filling exercise.

    i think engineers in DEC should start using all-in-1 too , this will
    bring more harmony between different division within the cooperations 
    because it seems to me that marketing and sales and head quarters 
    divisions use all-in-1 while engineering division use mail, this is 
    causing all this confusion we seen in the last few notes.

    i hereby suggest we all use all-in-1 in DEC, this will make us all
    on the same level of mail software and eases the operations of
    communications between different sections of the company.

    i think this is a great idea.

    \nasser

Well Nasser - I have a feeling you may have unwittingly initiated a long 
string of replies somewhat off the original topic. Suffice to say that most 
people in engineering don't want to use ALL-IN-1 as a matter of personal 
preference. It is actually an extensive and functionally very rich office 
automation system, of which mail is just one part. Since most technical 
people are unlikely to need all the various features in their day-to-day 
work, they don't want them all installed on the system. In general, I think 
people ought to be able to use whatever suits their purposes best.

	Richard.

O.K. folks, let's stop this ALL-IN-1 detour and get back on the main road.

Thanks,

Bob - Co-moderator DIGITAL

    
    This question is far broader than the original one but this appears to
    be an appropriate topic to put this under.  Maybe this is a waste of
    time because the last entry is May 7, two weeks ago and who reads old
    topics....but, here goes!  Is the Personnel Department in DEC any worse
    than any other company that you have experience with.  I ask this with
    a sense of irony.  I came to DEC five years ago and had to have an exit
    interview with the head of Personnel of the small company (<250
    employees) and after telling her of the several thousands of dollars
    raise that going to DEC represented, she told me to be careful, things
    were not all they appeared to be.  She had just come to this company;
    her immediate previous job.....Personnel at DEC!  
    

    
    RE: .19 agreed.....irony of ironies.
    
    
    
    
    Mike

    Ha!Ha!Ha!ha!ha!  So why didn't you listen to her?????

    I had experience with Intel's personell in Arizona in '88 and then went
    thru what should have been the same experience with DEC in '89 (Yea, I
    only stayed out a year, I could not stand missing out on the abuse.)
    
    AT INTEL:
    
    When I signed on, personell made contact immidately and made sure all
    my questions were answered and I had all required paerwork and
    instructions.
    
    AT DEC: 
    
    I did eventually make contact.  At one point I called a number that a
    secretary gave me for the personell person I was to talk to.  The
    person who answered that number told me off and said I was never to
    call that number again (it WAS a DEC phone, in a DEC office, and she
    was a DEC employee).
    
    AT INTEL:
    
    I spent a day (my first day) going thru a detailed orientation.  All
    insurance options were explained (documentation had been provided in
    advance).
    
    AT DEC:
    
    I had to find the right building, no one was expecting me, I stood
    around a lot.  Then I drove 60 miles to another office to meet with
    personell.  There were 3 new employees going thru orientation.  None
    of us had the same documentation.  The personell people (2) spent most
    of the time talking about one's recent vacation.  I ask what the
    difference was between health plan A and B. and she said "one of them
    cost more."  Neither person was able to answer any question ask, except
    when I ask where the ladie's room was.
    
    AT INTEL:
    
    On my second day, a personell consulor explained some tax implications
    of moving expenses, went over my 'to date' expenses to be sure the
    forms were correct, and WROTE ME A CHECK, ON THE SPOT for all out of
    pocket expenses.
    
    AT DEC:
    
    I won't bore you with details....  I was still fooling around with
    relocation expenses 6 months after the move
    
    Judy
    
                               

    
    >AT INTEL:    
    On my second day, a personell consulor explained some tax implications
    of moving expenses, went over my 'to date' expenses to be sure the
    forms were correct, and WROTE ME A CHECK, ON THE SPOT for all out of
    pocket expenses.
    
    >AT DEC:
    I won't bore you with details....  I was still fooling around with
    relocation expenses 6 months after the move
    
    >Judy


    Same here!!  I was told to get a pre-employment physical in May 1987 at 
    my own expense.  Send the receipt to Maynard and they would repay me.
    I was not reimbursed until December.  WHY??  because the people in charge 
    where quibbling over which CC the $65 should be charged to.  In the 
    meantime I got stiffed!

    
    .21.....
    
    	Turns out that less than a year after I left my old small company,
    	it went through a takeover and my entire department was laidoff.
    	At DEC, I still have a job and am still making more than I would 
    	have had I stayed.  Such is he nature of today's business.
    
    	As per the comments about the Personnel "department"...department
    	because I have met a few people in Personnel who were sincere, 
    	dedicated and willing to put their a**es on the line.  Having said that,
    	I have never seen the morass and discouragement in any of my other
    	work environments (and there have been quite a few) whose causes 
    	could be attibuted to "Personnel".  I am a little better equipped
    	than most to guage and treat dispair for I hold an advanced degree
    	in psychotherapy and previously worked with terminally ill persons.
    	Yet I am thoroughly at a loss to explain why a group of people
    	whose major concern is the morale of the staff in this company have
    	become a major cause of the destruction of that morale.  Or maybe 
    	that is not one of Personnel's concerns.  Well, anyway, if Personnel
    	is so bad, how can anyone/anything improve it! Or is that also just
    	spiting into the wind??
      
          
    
    	

    
    Re: .22
    
    With the exception of the relocation part which did not apply
    in my case, your description of your orientation at Intel could
    as well serve to document the way I was oriented here at Digital.
    Clearly it isn't broken everywhere.
    
    Steve
    

    re .25
    
    It depends on when and where, I am sure.  My first Digital orientation
    was in Colorado in 1981.  It was great, all questions answered,
    everything explained, lots of information about 'who we are and what we
    do'.  Couldn't have been better.
    
    1989 in Seattle was just the opposit.  I, as a former deccie had some
    advantage, the other two people were really New hires.  They were
    baffled and I was embarassed on behalf of Digital.  It was SO
    unprofessional.
    
    I am glad to hear they still do it right in some places.  I to have met
    a few HR/Per. folks who were interested in helping.  I quess the real
    question is "What is their job???"  Are they there to help employees
    with problems (managers, health care, payroll deductions?????) or are
    they there to help managers (performance problems, hiring/firering,
    disiplinary actions?????).  I would be interested in their charter.
    What do they think their job is?  Is employee moral part of it?  How
    about retention??  What are their metrics??
    
    Hmmmmm????
    Judy

    
    Re: .26
    
    To be fair, then, my orientation was also in 1981.  Maybe a
    lot has changed since then? ;^)
    
    Steve
    

re: .26

	Judy,

	You were orientated when you came to Seattle ?   WOW I thought
SMARTS was only the name of the project !   )**(

	Having worked with HRMS folks (HRMS systems developement) for several
years before joining DEC, excuse me Digital.  I was not prepared for the 
inital interview with personnel....I was kept waiting for an hour.  They
finally came for me just as I was walking out of Merrimac.   A year 
later in Colorado Springs, the Personel folks returned my mortage 
application because "I did not work for Digital".   After presenting myself
to them, they could not explain "why I did not work for Digital" especially
since they were hand delivering my paycheck.

	Ah yes, Personnel, the one organization which could be TSFO'ed and
not missed.

	Tom

    ... then, there is my sister-in-law. After she'd been working for DEC
    for over six months, she received a letter from Personnel telling her
    that, unfortunately, they could not offer her a job in DEC.
    
    We take the letter out whenever we want a good laugh, although lately,
    the laughs are more strained.
    
    kbs
    
    

    OK...everyone's message is loud and clear about Personnel.
    
    SO what do YOU want from Personnel??   What should their
    charter be?
    
    

>    OK...everyone's message is loud and clear about Personnel.
    
>    SO what do YOU want from Personnel??   What should their
>    charter be?
 

    Sounds like you might know a little bit about the HR at this
    company.....there is the Personnel section and then there is
    the Employment section....make sure not to confuse them with
    each other in their roles in the company.  Could you provide
    us with what the present charter of Personnel or HR is at the 
    present time so that we could see how close our wants come to
    what is decreed by corporate charter for us to get?  

    Thanks for your help in this matter.   
    

>    SO what do YOU want from Personnel??   What should their
>    charter be?

    i think personnel should be there first and of all to comfort DECeees at 
    times of hardships, to ease our pains and wipe our tears in times of 
    need whether it may be in good or hard times. 

    i think personnel should be there whenever and as needed to relieve our 
    feelings and emotions in its varying forms as DECeees go through life 
    with its related human emotions.

    i dont have too many experiences with personnel so i cant comment as far
    as how much they fulfill such a role as i indicated in the above
    mentioned part, but i would hope and advice that they do carry on and 
    do so.

    \nasser

    Sorry Tom, but you were already a Deccie when you came to Seattle, 
    no one was going to even try to give you any information.  I had been 
    out for a year working for Intel, so I needed to be re-orientated.
    Of course, in Fed.Way, it still took me 3 years to try to figure out
    what my job was.  You were lucky, you actually ACCOMPLICHED something
    there.
    
    Glad to hear you are still employed.  I thought they TSFOed all the
    people who did real work.
    
    Judy
    

Re: "What do you expect out of personnel?

1. Competence.  (should go without saying, but...)

2. Efficiency in handling issues in their domain.  (none of us can afford to
           be less than efficient these days, and Personnel is no exception.)

3. Impartiality.  That's the hard one.  I do not believe that HR/Personnel should
                  be management partisans in any management/individual conflict,
                  yet that is the observed pattern, over and over.  Personnel 
                  should be partisans of documented, objective codes of behavior
                  (i.e. the Orange Book), and not the local management poobah's
                   ideas/whims/interpretations thereof.

Simple enough?
Possible?


Kevin

    Personnel/HRM at DEC should mirror that of "Best in Class." HRM's own
    study of this several years ago indicated that DEC had three times as
    many HRM managers per employee as Best in Class computer companies.
    When we get serious about this, perhaps things will improve.
    Unfortunately, HRM here has become the corporate equivalent of the
    Harvard JFK School of Government, which exists primarily to give
    high-paying jobs to pols who have been voted out of office.
    
    BTW, in view of the study mentioned above, I can't avoid noticing the 
    irony in keeping an excessive number of HRM managers while shooting 
    DELTA and Corporate Quality.
    
    
    kbs
    
                                     

    RE. 35
    
    Sorry - you're wrong.  That study has been updated and I believe
    that the # is 1.5 HRM per # of employees.  This information has
    been updated in the last few months and there have been presentations
    of this data given at a few sites across the U.S.
    You leave the impression that Personnel has not "been touch" in the 
    downsizing/transition turmoil of this company. They have been
    downsized - they have not been exempt from the process.
    
    Before giving an opinion whether it be positive or negative,
    a person should check out the data beforehand. What was true
    3 years ago may not be true now.
    
    Re: previous responses....
    
    I don't know what the exact charter of Personnel is, but I do
    believe they are moving away from being the "buffer" between
    management and employees.  Managers are to "manage" their 
    employees.  Personnel
    
    Let me just say that it's amazing to read some of the stories
    I have read in this note and others...seems as if Personnel wasn't 
    consistent from one site to the next in the past - hopefully they will 
    be in the future.  
    
    Just because someone says "I dont know" and has no energy to help you out,
    doesn't mean that the answer isn't out there - it is you just need to 
    find someone willing to help you.   This applies to all areas of the company
    (like Purchasing and Account Payable) not just Personnel.
    
    So if you think HR is a "waste" - fine....but give examples how they
    can improve - so they can attempt to change.
    
    
    
    
     

>>    RE. 35
    
>>    Sorry - you're wrong.  That study has been updated and I believe
>>    that the # is 1.5 HRM per # of employees.  This information has
      been updated in the last few months and there have been presentations
      of this data given at a few sites across the U.S.

Thank you for your reassurance. However, I would feel better if I could see 
the figures. My long experience with HRM here teaches that they normally 
operate in the "squid mode:" when threatened, they discharge a cloud of
obscuring ink while rapidly retreating by expelling fluid under high 
pressure...

>>    I don't know what the exact charter of Personnel is, but I do
>>    believe they are moving away from being the "buffer" between
>>    management and employees.  Managers are to "manage" their 
>>    employees.  Personnel

Good question. What _IS_ Personnel's charter? From its actions it seems to 
have remained one of protecting management from the results of its, and their, 
actions. Please see my previous postings.
    
>>    Let me just say that it's amazing to read some of the stories
>>    I have read in this note and others...seems as if Personnel wasn't 
>>    consistent from one site to the next in the past...

You might say that.
    
>>    Just because someone says "I dont know" and has no energy to help you out,
>>    doesn't mean that the answer isn't out there - it is you just need to 
>>    find someone willing to help you.   This applies to all areas of the 
>>    company (like Purchasing and Account Payable) not just Personnel.
    
Yes, it does. And more's the pity when, after having sough help from non-HRM 
management, the result is to have had the managers approached go back to HRM 
and complain that you are "starting trouble."

>>    So if you think HR is a "waste" - fine....but give examples how they
>>    can improve - so they can attempt to change.
    
OK. That's not too difficult. Let's start with...

ACCOUNTABILITY! You screw over an employee, or fail to help one who comes to 
you with _discrete, verifiable facts_, and you hit the street so fast you leave 
skid marks across the lobby carpet. In the absense of this, nothing else will 
work or is even worth talking about.  
    
ken

    Nasser
    
    I think you have Personnel confused with EAP.  If you want a touchy
    feely meeting, you need to consult EAP.  
    
    I believe personnel should be here to assist the employee with
    "logistics".  I believe HR should be here for career-related work.  I
    believe we should have a third department for work-related arbitration
    on what we perceive as employee-to-employee conflicts.
    
    Sounds kind of union-ish, but having come up against personnel in the
    past seeking their assistance with a dysfunctional manager/employee
    relationship I know first hand they will not stick their neck on the
    line and go against a manager.  And what is worse - the  manager is
    allowed to continue in the organization and continue the negative
    practices over and over again.  I personally know of 5 people who were
    directly affected negatively because of this person who is still
    wielding his sword!!!
    
    -sandy
    

My experience in the Philadelphia area with HR has been excellent. My orientation
was conducted with clarity, completeness, and the folks since that time 7 yrs ago
have been extremely helpful. Of course where there used to be 8-9 people serving
about 800 employees now there are 3 serving 800-x employees. HR seems to get more
than a fair share of bashing, but I have had mixed results from sales, PS,
central engineering, and field services over the years. All units are made up of
PEOPLE, some are very good at their jobs and some are not.

Terry
 

re:39 
I have a situation where my residence is in one state (with 1 set of HMO's 
available) and have worked in several states out of a cost center back in
greater Maynard area.  Thus my contact with HR is often my AUDEX mailbox
having a discussion with their answering service.

Any time I've tried to get hold of Barbara Holder (benefits) or
Lou Kedetsky (recruiting) both in the CHO office (Mt. Laurel office is just
the other side of the Deleware river from Philly...) they have provided quick
and courtious response, even if it is from a remote site they are visiting that
day.  Furthermore, I recieved accurate information every time! Yes believe it
or not, some people can still navigate through the bureaucracy!! 

I hesitated in mentioning their names, since if they ever got promoted 
out of their current position, their replacement would have a real tough
time filling those shoes. 
 I wonder if they file an expense claim for worn-out shoe leather!  :^) 


re:others previous
I believe there is considerable evidence that supports the notion that 
various people have numerous  different perceptions about the role of the
personnel office.  Some clairification would be in order.  I have seen
countless episodes in 20 years of management where managerial tactics 
lead to a confrontation where the manager or subordinate invites personnel
into a discussion only after the employee-boss relationship is in shambles. 

Some shambles are worse than others.  
How you play the hand your dealt  (either employee, or supervisor)
can be a real challenge. 
I think that within  Digital the famous words of the prison warden apply 
from the movie Cool Hand Luke:
    "What we have here,    is a failure to communicate" 
People will listen to (and follow the leadership of) ONLY those they respect.
I think there are instances we all
could relate to where certain people for whatever reason loose that respect,
then suddenly discover ....hey nobody is listening!  Then panic sets in, and
somebody ends up in the personnel office.
These breakdowns in the course of normal daily activity can, and will crush
 any structure put in place that diverts energy away from restoring normal
communication channels.  

From the sound of many replies previous I suspect the
HR department also is in need of a "branding campaign" for a new slogan.  

 How about "We're hear(sic) for YOU!"

    I will never again attend any meeting with any member of Personnel
    without taking a tape recorder. That is probably the single best
    protection an employee can have when dealing with "HRM" at DEC.
    
    
    kbs
    

    re. 41
    Ken,
    
    Just how many Personnel people were involved in your situation
    which you mentioned before?  1 or 2?
    
    Unless you went up the entire chain of Personnel management - 
    you have no right or authority to "bash them" as badly as you 
    are.
    
    One bad handling of a situation does not constitute a failure of the 
    "entire" organization!
    
    As I and others have mentioned, in many cases it's the
    individuals you deal with that can make a situation/solution
    positive or negative.   IN ALL areas of this company there are 
    people who present their  department well because they care
    - and others who don't.  We all can name departments that we've had
    bad experiences with.
    
    Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, there are people 
    in Personnel who listen, care and take action.
    
    And by the way, in the future do not refer to your "gripe" in 
    Personnel as "HRM" - because the HR manager of Personnel has never
    spoken with you...If you're referring to a specific area/dept. then you 
    should refer to it that way...so that people don't think you're speaking 
    as if you have dealt with the top level of Personnel.
    
    If there's anyone else out there in Personnel who would like to 
    back me up on some of my replies and give further input I would
    appreciate it - don't particularly like hanging out here defending
    the org. myself ;')
    
    
     

    
    The one that trys usually gets so beat up that in the end it is 
    just not worth it.

re .42:

There are a large number of assumptions in this message.  I'll try to
identify a few.  I'm not claiming that all of these assumptions are 100%
false -- my point is to ask the author of .42 to question his assumptions.
Are you really making the assumptions listed below?  If so, why are you 
so sure that they are true?  Do you know enough about Ken's experience
and what he did about it to justify your assumptions about his situation?


    Just how many Personnel people were involved in your situation
    which you mentioned before?  1 or 2?
    
    Unless you went up the entire chain of Personnel management - 
    you have no right or authority to "bash them" as badly as you 
    are.
    
Seems to assume that this was just a local problem and that the problem
was NOT taken up the personnel chain, or to any other authority.  Also
seems to assume that there is no right to complain of mistreatment in
public without first summoning the energy to fight for justice at
every single step up the chain.


    One bad handling of a situation does not constitute a failure of the 
    "entire" organization!

Seems to assume that Ken's experience was an isolated incident involving 
a small number of low level people and just one affected employee,
and that higher level Personnel folks didn't/don't know about it.

    
    As I and others have mentioned, in many cases it's the
    individuals you deal with that can make a situation/solution
    positive or negative.   IN ALL areas of this company there are 
    people who present their  department well because they care
    - and others who don't.  We all can name departments that we've had
    bad experiences with.

Seems to assume that just a few people in Personnel contributed to this
problem, perhaps simply by poor presentation rather than doing anything
wrong.  Seems to assume that there's no possibility that it could be 
part of a systemic problem with the HR organization as a whole.

    
    Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, there are people 
    in Personnel who listen, care and take action.

Seems to assume that Ken dislikes *all* personnel people from top to
bottom and feels that *all* of them are doing a bad job.  Also seems
to assume that if an HR person (e.g. a low pevel person) cares and
wants to take action, then something will actually be accomplished.

    
    And by the way, in the future do not refer to your "gripe" in 
    Personnel as "HRM" - because the HR manager of Personnel has never
    spoken with you...If you're referring to a specific area/dept. then you 
    should refer to it that way...so that people don't think you're speaking 
    as if you have dealt with the top level of Personnel.

Seems to assume that nothing serious happened (a "gripe" is by definition
a complaint about a minor annoyance).

Seems to assume that the HR manager of Personnel (who is that?) has not
heard of Ken's problem. nor anyone at a higher level.

    
    If there's anyone else out there in Personnel who would like to 
    back me up on some of my replies and give further input I would
    appreciate it - don't particularly like hanging out here defending
    the org. myself ;')
    
I'm very sorry if you feel beaten up or put upon.  I can only encourage
you to imagine that your roles are reversed and think how you'd react
to people who strongly defend someone you feel injured you severely.
And of course, those who are injured should also imagine their roles
reversed and think about the reactions of someone who, because of their
assumptions or any other reason, simply don't accept that anything as bad 
as that injury could really have been done deliberately.

	Enjoy,
	Larry    

O.K.  I sent a query about a job to Sandy Bradshaw in SHR .  She replied the
next day and even answered a follow up query.  Politely, timely, professionally!

Three cheers for one Personnel person doing her job properly!

    Sandy is O.K......,but, any other good examples?
    
    Marc H.

Sure, I know at least one excellent Personnel person.  I won't mention 
names because they are lower level people and probably wouldn't appreciate 
having their names bandied about in this file.  

	Enjoy,
	Larry