AKiCiF: Job descriptions

[rolanni]

I know we have a couple of HR-types reading here. I'm coming away from one of the most surreal conversations I have ever had with an HR person and I need a...triple-check, it would be, on current usage.

Suppose one has a Job Description. It goes like this:

Job Title: Secretary, Ministry of Silly Walks

Function: To provide secretarial support to the chairman of the Ministry of Silly Walks

Duties:
1. Sort the mail
2. Answer public inquiries regarding the nature and history of MoSW
3. Produce and distribute posters advertising MoSW functions
4. Walk silly
5. Monitor office supply levels and order as necessary
6. Other duties as assigned

My question lies with Number 6. I've only been working off and on in a clerical capacity since 1968, so my understanding may be flawed, but what I take Number 6 to mean is that if my boss, the Minister of MoSW, should decide that the Ministry needs, oh, a webpage and assigns me to build and maintain it, that's an "other duty" -- which is to say, a new task not anticipated when the core list of duties was compiled by whoever compiled the original job description.

Does Number 6, in current HR philosophy, also mean that the Prime Minister may append the Ministry of Funny Mustaches to the above job description as "other duties" stipulating that the MoFM is its own power, equal in the org chart to the MoSW?

Inquiring minds...

Comments

MoFM

[kalilama.livejournal.com]

Around here that is called we-are-laying-off-the-clerical-staff-but-we-are-not-laying-off-the-Dean, oh and who is going to do the actual work if we lay off the clerical staff? We will create "departmental/divisional synergies" so we can do the work with fewer staff. Same work. Impossible equation.

Perhaps I am becoming cynical.

Re: MoFM

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

Well...they're not laying anybody off, that I know of. But they're not exactly hiring extra folks who-do-the-actual-work, either. Which doesn't keep them from bringing new programs into being. That need clerical support.

Re: MoFM

[kalilama.livejournal.com]

Ah yes, corollary to the you're-doing-such-a-great-job-you-can-do-more-of-it gambit.

[moon-happy.livejournal.com]

Yes, he can do that. It can be useful to keep detailed track of the new duties for him to determine how much of your time new guy's duties occupy and how they differ from the duties you are already performing for the old guy. It may (or may not) be useful in negotiating relief or help or a raise. Good luck.

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

All righty, then. I would accept more easily that he could do that if the job description said:

Job Title: Secretary, Ministry of Silly Walks and whateverthehellelse we decide to add on, whenever.

The placement of "other duties" seems specific to the job outlined in the title and to the function. Using it as the rationale for adding on whole 'nother ministries in addition seems like bait-and-switch. I hope I don't wake up one morning and find I don't work for either MoSW or MoFM, but have been arbitrarily reassigned to the Ministry of Frivolous Explosions.

Though, yanno...

It may (or may not) be useful in negotiating relief or help or a raise.

At a guess -- may not. I remember a time when a raise of a certain level was a subtle warning that it was time to look for another job; you weren't living up to expectations. Nowadays, they give you a raise less than the former insult level and tell you it proves how much they love you.

Good luck.

Thanks. I figure I'm going to wind up living under a bridge one way or the other. I just have to figure out which way I'd rather go broke.

[herbmcsidhe.livejournal.com]

Nowadays, they give you a raise less than the former insult level and tell you it proves how much they love you.

That's because nowadays, kissing you is a prosecutable offence in the workplace.

[badgermirlacca.livejournal.com]

I did job evaluation for eight years, so forgive me if I'm a dunce.

Are you saying that the secretary for one department is now also working for another department which is equal to the first department in the org chart? Or are you saying that the secretary IS the second organization?

If the first, yeah, they can do that, because the work still falls under the general rubric of "secretarial duties" as generally understood (making travel reservations, for instance, or scheduling meeting rooms).

If the second, and the secretary is now functioning as the second organization, then that would be, in my opinion and, I think, in the opinion of any professional job evaluator, cause to have the secretary's job seriously re-evaluated, because the duties involved are going to include decision-making and independent decisions that tend toward reclassification to exempt status (which may NOT be what you want to do).

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

The first option is in play.

I do wonder why organizations bother to hire "Secretary, Ministry of Silly Walks," if they don't have to play by their own rules. Why not just hire, "Secretary, why do you care who you work for?" Or just "Secretary Thirty-Six."

In the case of my particular ministry, I'm already the support for a "consolidated department" of four programs. Chairs who are used to getting one-quarter of my attention are now going to get...considerably less. Which isn't going to be good for bidness. Though I do find the notion that I am Infinitely Expandable charming.

[keristor.livejournal.com]

"I do find the notion that I am Infinitely Expandable charming"

My doctor doesn't when it is about my waistline *g*. I try telling him Walt Whitman's famous "I am large, I contain multitudes" and he doesn't buy it...

[badgermirlacca.livejournal.com]

There's a difference between folks who hire secretaries and folks who evaluate and describe jobs (and match them to the market to determine pay ranges). Calling someone the Secretary to the Department of Silly Walks designates that person as the contact point for the DSW, specifically, with a range of understood duties for that department. Since the duties, broadly speaking, are the same no matter whether you work for the DWS, the Dept. of Agriculture, the Ministry of Magic, or God in Her Heaven, you're right, it doesn't matter in the least who you work for. Which is why the pay ranges (for persons in the same occupation and in the same geographical area) are pretty similar--again, broadly speaking.

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

Actually, speaking personally, it matters a great deal *to me* who I work for. When I applied for the job I have now, there were several other similar jobs available in other ministries on campus, for which I did not apply, since inmyprofessionalopinion, I would do my best work for Silly Walks.

Hiring someone under a job description that states: Secretary, Ministry of Silly Walks and then arbitrarily changing the rules is bait-and-switch -- not just for me, but for the Minister of Silly Walks, who, quite reasonably, thought he had a secretary all to himself and now must share.

...I'm really having a very hard time coming to terms with the fact that my job description means *nothing*, and can't understand why on earth the Overlords *bothered* to create "Secretary, MoSW," "Secretary, Ministry of Silly Sentences," "Secretary, Ministry of Frivolous Explosions." It seems a waste of time and effort. It would be much more efficient to simply hire "Secretary, Shut Up and Do What You're Told," and shift us around as whimsy strikes, since we're not really people, and there are no specific skills attached to the support of any of the various departments that could possibly matter at all.

It sounds like I'm shooting the messenger, for which I apologize. I would like insight into the rationale for creating separate job descriptions at all.

And why, if what the job description *means* to say is, "Secretary, Ministry of Silly Walks and whatever the hell we feel like adding later", it doesn't, yanno, *say* that.

...the violation of the logic of the document is upsetting me more than any other aspect of this.

[badgermirlacca.livejournal.com]

I understand why you're upset, and I agree (boy do I agree) that it makes a difference to the individual as to who they work for (insert chorus of "I have a little list, they'll never be missed").

HOWEVER. Looking at it from a corporate standpoint (and in this sense, a university is exactly like a corporation), in order to create pay scales for jobs which occur not just in the MSW and DAE but in EVERY department in the university, you have to create a job description which includes the basic essential duties (eg, distributing mail, answering phones, typing correspondence, et cetera) so that you can ensure that every person in every department in the university is paid approximately (within the determined pay range) for the same duties. Those duties, basically, will be the same for a secretary no matter who he reports to, although whether or not the work is interesting and the boss is decent is going to vary wildly. You (generically, not personally) aren't being paid for the stress of working for a pig of a boss, nor are you being paid for working in an organization where the work is fascinating. You're being paid for the essential duties in the job description.

It isn't practical to create a job description for each individual department, although when a job is posted it will APPEAR to be unique, because it isn't practical to create an individual pay range for every single person in the university. Therefore, secretaries have a basic job description and are, in fact, interchangeable as far as the system is concerned. So are maintenance personnel, cooks, campus security, and adjunct professors. IOW it isn't just you.

And it isn't true that your job description means nothing. It means a great deal: it defines the minimum and maximum that you can be paid and the size of the increase you can obtain (assuming the budget allows for increases!). It does NOT mean that you are the personal property of a given department, because from a personnel management POV there has to be a way to put the people where the work is and, unfortunately, figure out when and if the organization (in this case, the university) can eliminate excess personnel, either by layoffs or attrition, when there just isn't enough money to go around.

So from that perspective, yes, you ARE hired as "Secretary, Shut Up and Do As You're Told." Everyone who's hired into a large company in an administrative position is in exactly the same boat. If you're lucky and times are good, you stay in the same department and become essential, and you make the job your own, and you're happy. It sounds like you weren't lucky this time, and times are not good, and I'm sorry.

Minister of Funny Mustaches

[(Anonymous)]

Ministers sometimes don't think things all the way through.

You could point out that if the MoFM does not have a secretarial type person to assist him, you could in fact be expected to spend more time on his staff than on that of the MoSW's.

Usually, other duties, should only include your present emplorer, MoSW, and not be loaned out to anyone else.

MoSW IS WRONG in not defining duties and length of service to MoFM.

Get a memo or something in written form. Post-it note if he is memo challenged. Take it to HR and request more money.

MoFM will then be on his own.

HM

[klingonguy.livejournal.com]

I have a similar clause at the end of my job description. At the end of the day, it seems to translate as "serves at the pleasure of the CEO." I'm frequently called upon to do things that are not otherwise part of my job description, but which nonetheless do fit within the larger range of my abilities and skill sets (guess who gets to polish official documents and letters that are going out to important people/agencies?).

On the other hand, particularly in the current economy, it's a good thing to be employed.

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

On the other hand, particularly in the current economy, it's a good thing to be employed.

And there is a certain amount of black humor to be had in holding a day-job that I have to subsidize with my writing income.

[klingonguy.livejournal.com]

And there is a certain amount of black humor to be had in holding a day-job that I have to subsidize with my writing income.

Yep, pretty much the size of it.

[joycependle.livejournal.com]

Good luck! (Sounds like you'll need it.)

Document, Document, Document!

[(Anonymous)]

My experience is in the Federal civil service, so I am sure there are differences. However, it sure sounds like you will now be serving two separate-yet-supposedly-equal masters (MoSW and MoFM). (I think they also call this situation an "unfunded mandate"....) Even though the "rules" probably don't allow this to happen, in this economy no one will blink when it does.

I strongly recommend you get everything you can in writing - percentage of time to be spent supporting each Minister, who writes your evaluations and how much input the other guy has, who establishes your real priorities (the PM??) etc. If necessary, draft it yourself and route it for signature - to both Ministers and the PM! Lots of luck!
Mary

[(Anonymous)]

At my $WORKPLACE, we are covered by a collective bargaining agreement (and clerical staff are represented by it). If there is such an agreement that pertains to your position, you may want to look through it. In conversations with various stewards and labor relations representatives (all on the union side), "other duties as assigned" is understood to mean no more than 10% of your job. If it grows past that, it's time to get an updated job description, which has the benefit of needing HRs approval. Also, by contract (if not by law), our job descriptions must accurately portray the work we do.

If I were faced with this particular situation, I'd write up a new job description with both old and new tasks on it, and assign percentages (or hours per week) to each task. Then show that to both old and new Ministers. If they agree to it as you drew it up, terrific, just be sure to stick with the percentages for the first few weeks so they can feel the pain. If they don't agree, suggest they work out what the percentages should be and get back to you with the new percentages, reminding them that their numbers cannot go past 100%.

I'd also contact someone in HR and see what's involved in getting an updated job description, what is involved in getting a raise or stipend for additional duties and other such things.

Good luck, this sort of stuff is a royal PITA.
--Susan in California

[romsfuulynn.livejournal.com]

Also from the federal arena so we have a lot more protection, but what I'd do after a week or two assessing the work that needs to be done at FM, is email both the ministers and outline what needs to be done each place with some prioritization and what should be put off. (e.g. both places need their mail opened and distributed every day so that's a priority for both of them, but posters for SW come before or after filing of FM.

And journal - just a line or two per task so you know what can be done.

The other thing is to consider what may be offloaded (e.g. can you get seven or 10 hours of a student aide, who can physically open and stamp the mail and do some rough presorts...and leave you more time for making posters and answering queries.

List current duties, tasks and time expenditure

[(Anonymous)]

You might do a list with just your current duties and estimated time spent weekly. It's been my experience that job descriptions aren't kept up to date very well and don't necessarily reflect today's reality.

The Minister of SW could be asked to review said duties to determine which of them he would want deleted in order to accomplish the new tasks.

Good luck!

Barb in Bandon

[saruby.livejournal.com]

Documentaion is the key! In this case, documenting what you are currently doing, what you will have to do, how much time it will take, etc. Get it in writing from HR!!! Make them specify exactly how much of your time goes to each ministry. Make sure both ministers are given copies of this document and that they understand that you will be working two jobs in the time alloted for one. Then document everything you are spending time on. This is a pain in the butt, however, if MoSW suddenly complains that his work is not getting done, you will be able to demonstrate that he is getting the work to which he is entitled.

If you have a union, complain to them.

Have HR rewrite your job description to be more specific. My guess is that they make it intentionally vague just so they can do this sort of stuff. BUt push.

You may be able to solicit support from those you are supporting. The people you are actually currently working for will likely NOT want to suddenly have half of your time/energy for their projects, so they may be willing to back you on this.

IMHO, "other duties as assigned" does not mean adding a department to your current load, but in this economy.....

[alfreda89.livejournal.com]

Document, document, document -- in DUPLICATE, and take the copies home nightly. You are not allowed to work more than 40 hours a week, IIRC? At least you don't get paid for more than that, and you sure don't want those hours to start creeping up. They become "Expected to Work Those Hours" quickly.

This is becoming the new way to cover "We can't afford to hire, how will the work get done?" Unfortunately, the people struggling to do all this were just barely making Life work before the bottom fell out of everything. We don't have the strength/energy to become three or four people.

I like a mixture of the above approaches. Make sure the current boss knows what's happened, and what it will mean to your schedule. Make sure each guy understands he's not getting more than 20 hours a week, tops. Make THEM decide what is priority and what is leaving the budget/building, and give them a deadline to make the decision.

Expect them to change their minds within two weeks of The Decision -- and for yelling to ensue. You CYA with paper and signatures everything, and point them toward whomever made this decree -- HR, the PM, etc. The important thing is, keep an eye on what you know cannot slip, and keep it up prominently in the lists you prepare for the Ms. Keep in mind it is not your fault, and you must make sure they are all praising you while complaining bitterly to the PM or whoever. And find out if previous people doing All This got paid a lot more.

They won't pay you a lot more = but you might get them to pay you a little more. In fact, the Ms may start combing their budgets to get five or ten hours more of you a week. And that doesn't hurt.

Keep an ear to the underground. If the rumbling starts to look like they may throw you under the bus, take the work copy of your document notebook to HR and say: "This is what you mandated, this is what they agreed on, they are now fighting, what do you suggest?"

I never used to be this intricate about my day job, but when I get a new one, you bet it's going to be different. I must write down everything now. So There Will Be Evidence....

Hasn't anyone worked for a college?

[(Anonymous)]

Professors have never had a job in the real world and so do not quite understand the concept of a scarce resource such as time or set deadline with fixed necessities.

In a professor's world, they create a flexible schedule and modify it at will - this is called a syllabus. Content is added and/or deleted at will (his) and every project (semester) always ends on time and successfully. Remember, the professor creates the final and then grades the students - not the other way around.

So in this world all tasks are imminently achievable.

Ironically, education is not the answer, and sadly neither is documentation. The secretary can only do what is possible in the amount of PAID time.

- Ellen, a professor's wife - don't get me started

Re: Hasn't anyone worked for a college?

[saruby.livejournal.com]

While it is true that most professors have never worked "in the real world", it is also true that most HR people have. They understand deadlines, time limitations and how that affects job performance, etc. The point here is not that job 2 will go away, it is to prove that one is doing all that one can within the alloted time despite the fact that neither job 1 or job 2 will be satisfied. This KEEPS THE JOB, which is important!!!

Re: Hasn't anyone worked for a college?

[groblek.livejournal.com]

Indeed - in most colleges, while the professors can complain if you aren't accommodating them, it's HR and their bureaucracy who decides if you get to keep your job, hence the need to document to give them evidence that you're doing all you can within the constraints given. And while many professors may assume that the staff will work overtime as needed to get things done, most HR departments have fits about that sort of thing, and be firm in insisting that no, staff won't do any such thing.

[(Anonymous)]

To all of the above, I would add that it is likely to your best advantage to convey the impression that you are willing to what does the most good, but they need to collectively agree on what the priorities are.

When it becomes clear that any one task is taking more than its allotted time and impinging on other scheduled tasks, your job is not to be a hero by, do favors or otherwise strive to make them a gift of your unpaid time. Your job is to have those whose job it is to make those decisions decide what the new priorities are and take responsibility for their actions of assigning too much work for the available time.

As I was once told, "if I can't trust that you will say 'no', how can I believe it when you say 'yes' ? You gain lots of points to for managing your time boundaries.

There is no real benefit to a bunch of tasks poorly or partially completed, so let the powers that be decide what is in their best interest.

I've had this conversation more than once, the empowerment is in letting timely decisions about resource allocation happen as early as possible. It is also worthwhile for the organization to get feedback about resource limitations by tasks going unaddressed. Resources are always limited, management's job is to use them to greatest effect.

Can you change item 6 to "other duties of a similar nature and scope" ?

Bob

[(Anonymous)]

As an alternative to getting people to agree on tasks and division of time, if you don't already have one, a time keeping system listing all your tasks in a day and the amount of time (to 15 minutes) spent on each task.

Sort of -
Task: Posters
Day: Today
Time: 2.15 hrs
Notes: For Fred Smith's Costcutting exercise.

It may seem like a bit of work but it takes about 10 minutes a day and at work we find this very handy later on when asked why we didn't get task x done.

Good luck,

Tricia

Document your time and hold tight on working only the hours you are getting paid for

[capricchio.livejournal.com]

There was much good advice listed. Document what you do each day (just scribble it on a post-it for starters and collate at the end of the work day.) Make a list of what you perceive your responsibilities to be and how you think they are prioritized and then get the ministers to rearrange the list (which they will when it is presented to them.) You'll find that people really do recognize that there are only so many hours in the week and now is a perfect time to use home life as a reason for no free hours. (They're going to insist you do posters when your husband was in the hospital??? Use guilt as a tool for managing the managers.) And truly, do not work extra hours for free. You will obviously get nothing out of it and people need to get use to paying their way.

Another minor point on setting expectations

[(Anonymous)]

You probably already know this. However you act with the people new to the situation, they don't know it was ever any different and their expectations will be set accordingly. So, if they find you capable during your paid for time, firm in your limits and forcing decisions to where they ought to be confronted, they will just assume that's the way it is. Its why newly hired managers are often advised to set high standards during the first weeks - people get accustomed to it. It is much easier to later relax things than to tighten them up.

Bob

[oberon.livejournal.com]

Essentially, from an HR / management standpoint, yes, you were doing secretarial for department X, also doing it for department Y is not outside of your core job function or a 'new' duty per sae.

However, it SOUNDS like a variation on 'We don't have the budget to hire more staff, so let's pile more on the ones we have who can actually do the job'.

Your best option, should this look likely to overload you, is to start pulling a Scotty.

[oberon.livejournal.com]

Ooops... wasn't quite done that. What I mean by that, is:
"I can't do it before (two days from now), I have all this other work ahead of you".... then pull it off in a day and a half. You still look like a miracle worker, people start to understand your workload.

Finagle that into either the people piling work on you prioritizing it amongst themselves, or hiring you an assistant.... which makes you a supervisor, which means a pay increase, or should.

problem solved!

Maybe.