Conference 7.286::digital

I'm not positive but I believe if you're on a project deemed "critical" 
(whatever that means), that you can be held on longer than the customary
2-4 weeks (I would not think asking someone to stay an extra month or two would
be THAT bad, but the 9 months in your case sounds excessive).  If an
employee really doesn't want to stay the manager should realize several points:

	o	the employee will be miserable and in turn make everyone else 
		miserable
	o	if that employee is determined to leave the company as a last
		resort, then DEC loses
	o	it's just not nice!

Although I've never been in this situation, I would suspect that the manager
of a critical project would strongly suggest that an employee not transfer, but
I just don't see how preventing someone from leaving will be productive.

-mark

	And I'm sure they realize that you are going to do a helluva job
	for the next 9 months !  

	I've been with DEC for 7 years now and being an underling (ie.
	Programmer, Sr. Prg, and Pri. Prg) I have found out that 
	management usually does what it wants but makes a cursury (SP)
	effort in allowing your input.  I was involved in a project 
	that was to redo from top to bottom DEC's Order Processing System,
	3/4 of the way thru it (with many delays and push-outs, due to 
	users insistance on NOT SIGNING OFF ON THE SPEC), a subset of the
	group was told to go out and evaluate a software product within
	DEC called MACH I that they said could be converted to do 80% of
	the things our SPEC-out system would do.  Well I was in that 
	subset and did extensive analysis of the guts of the MACH I 
	system..... and totally panned it !  We wrote up a nice review of
	the system and documented all our misgiving.  Do you think we 
	were listened to ????  Not only that but I then read in a 
	Newsletter later on that the reason the decision was made to 
	adopt MACH I came from our report ????  The decision had already
	been made prior to our research of the MACH I system, it was done
	to placate the peons and to get us to be familiar with the code
	in the MACH I system.  The problem I had was we confronted 
	management with this and they LIED !!!  To make a long story 
	somewhat shorter,  I feel I was labeled afterwards because of my
	work on the review of the MACH I system.  We eventually merged
	our group with the people who origanally wrote the MACH I system,
	and I had to get out after around 6 months.  

	The moral of the story is you are a worker NOT a manager and you
	will be told what to do !   It's not like this in ALL of DEC but
	it sounds like you're in that type of situation.  Do the best you
	can,  stay outta trouble, and when you're times up take your 
	talents elsewhere (within DEC) its worth the wait.


	Chuck

    The similarities here with my own experience is interesting.  I've
    found that certain portions of DEC are so tunnel-visioned with their
    own interests that they tend to forget: (1) we are all the same
    company, and (2) an employee who is unhappy for sound reasons (and
    your reasons definitely appear sound) is not going to be productive.
    
    Maybe you could document the entire situation, going more in depth
    into some of the items you alluded to in .0, then schedule an
    appointment, ODP-style, with somebody high-up-enough to be effective,
    yet removed enough to be objective.
    
    Re blocking transfers due to project-criticalness is *not* policy
    and I personally can attest to that.
    
    Jon

Re: 18 month verbal commitment:
	A Verbal contract is as good as the paper its written on.

While you and you manager may have the most wonderful relationship,
outside circumstances sometimes change the position the rules you started
with.  If you are sure that the rules won't change, verbal commitments
are ok.  If you want protection, get it in writing.

While we're on the topic of 18 months...There's a rule (recently imposed)
that's called the two year rule.  It may only apply to SWS and FS, but
it says that WC 4 employees must stay in a job they transfer into for
24 months (12 months for non-exempt employees).  This rule is generally
interpreted to be the same cost centre or district.  The rule is nulified
if your position "goes away" or the department is disolved.  If you
are a non-exempt employee, you have no problem.  If you are exempt,
you have a month to wait.

Re: blocking transfers:  it's been done elsewhere.  Last quarter, it
seemed that all (most?) transfers into or out of the CSC in Colorado
Springs were blocked.


You indicate that transfers are blocked.  You are not blocked from
interviewing.  (I believe that your management CANNOT block you from
interviewing as long as YOU follow the rules - such as letting your
manager know you are interviewing.)  If you find a job, you have two
alternatives...wait until you are "freed" or have your new boss apply
enough pressure to expidite your transfer.  It sounds like you are an
asset to the company and your new manager will not want to lose you.

If you do go interviewing and your current management chain doesn't
know, you and your new manager can get into deep trouble.  Equally if
you find a new job, get an offer, and accept the offer, its between
your current manager and your new manager to negotiate a release date.
You can only make suggestions for the good of the company, your current
project, or your new project.

'Hang in there.

BobW

.-1

I think .-1 said it real good.  If you legally look for and find a new job
(it may be hard to get an offer if someone knows your transfer is being held
up but you should tell them the circumstances), you'll at least have someone
to go to bat for you!

-mark

    
    Once a manager threatened to stop me from leaving...said I had a
    2 year commitment following a reorg.  I asked him the following
    simple question:
    
    	"Can I make your life more miserable for 2 years or can you make
    my life more miserable for 2 years?"
    
    never got an answer but I did get a new job! :-]
    

I was going to delete note 190.0, but I see the moderators have 
beaten me to it.  No flames to them please -- I sort of gave them 
permission to do so.

I'm sorry I violated some Legal Department policy I never heard 
of.  It won't happen again.

For those who just tuned in:

On Friday, my group manager announced that, with the support of 
his superior, a Sr. VP, a new practice was being instituted, to 
wit:  no members of my product group would be allowed to transfer 
to another DEC job until June.  I wrote a note Monday (the now 
infamous 190.0 :-) describing this, naming the group manager and 
VP involved, because I always have believed that one should take 
responsibility for one's actions.

I also, in an apparantly futile effort to be fair, and also, to 
be honest, to vent a little, mentioned some background, including 
some stuff that many people felt Legal would nix.  So obviously, 
I won't repeat it here.

Now on with our story:

In meeting with the group's personnel rep, it was explained to be 
that the blocking of transfers meant the following:

1. The group manager decides that for "business needs", all 
personnel must be kept on the job, regardless of whether they 
had passed their at-hire committment time.
2. If a manager wants to hire me, s/he has to speak to the 
group manager, who will inform the hiring manager that I am 
considered to be committed, due to "business needs"
3.  The hiring manager can proceed to hire me, but honestly 
folks, how many managers are going to buck a Senior VP to hire 
someone who isn't a superstar, merely very good?

I met via ODP with the group manager and personnel rep late 
yesterday afternoon.  I came out of the meeting feeling that 
while my skills were valued (as are those of a thouroughbred 
horse), I was not valued or respected as a person.  I also felt 
that attempts were made to impugn my integrity and that of my 
colleagues.  Please note how carefully I worded the last two 
sentences:  I don't want to hear or read that I said that 
"so-and-so did such-and such".

I don't know whether I have the strength to pursue ODP further; 
I'm feeling pretty trashed (also, unfortunately, by some of the 
writers in this conference :-( ).

I am pursuing other avenues, including wimping out and bowing my 
neck to the massa.

Please direct criticism of me to me directly via MAIL -- there's 
no point in cluttering up the NOTES server with that stuff.  Any 
support, help in knowing what to do, reality checking, similar 
horror tales, etc., would be appreciated, either here or via 
MAIL.

Now I'll go crawl back under the rock that smashed into me on 
Friday.

Bobbi
_who_used_to_believe_that_"Do what is 
right"_really_WAS_company_policy

    A long time ago in a place far away I worked for Digital. I told
    my management and personnel I wanted to transfer to New England.
    I found a job I was interested in (in the JOBS book) and asked
    personnel to try and set up and interview. I was even willing to
    go on it on my own time (I was going to be on vacation in NH anyway).
    Nothing. Two weeks later after several more contacts with personnel,
    still nothing. I told personnel I was going to work in New England
    and the only question was who was I going to be working for. I might
    as well have been talking to a brick wall.
    
    At this point I told the headhunter who had been after me for months
    that I'd interview with his client. The week I gave my notice the
    personnel person (who could see my desk from his) sent me a note
    in interoffice mail that he had finally sent my resume to NH. It
    was now more than 6 weeks after I asked him to.
    
    I spent 2.5 years working for another vendor who was more then happy
    to relocate me, train me, *and* give me a big raise. I beleive DEC
    lost more then I did.
    
    When I came back to work for DEC I did not have much to do with
    personnel. None of my transfers since (I've been back just under 5
    years) have had much involvement with personnel (although they have 
    managed to keep my offer letters from arriving until after the first 
    week at my new job every time).
    
    Moral of the story? Any manager who refuses to help his workers
    find other jobs is not working in the best interests of the Company.
    
    What would I do if I were facing the problem in 190.0/.7? Take the
    open door policy as high as I needed to get it fixed. If it takes
    a visit to KO I'd do it. Failing that I would seriously consider
    leaving DEC. If I couldn't get it resolved then either DEC does
    not want me or or I sure don't want DEC or both. I really love DEC.
    I hope I never get into that kind of jam and I feel real bad that
    someone has.
    
    		Alfred
    

    Whilst Alfred was writing .8 I was sending a similar story and moral
    to Bobbi by mail. I won't repeat the thing here, but
    
    (a) I found my immediate management (at the time) and personnel
    unhelpful in exploring international relocation.
    
    (b) the ODP taken far enough helped
    
    (c) time helped (I found a manager who was supportive).
    
    (d) there may be a >real< business need that could be explained through
    the odp.
    
    To be trite "things are always blackest before the dawn" - this
    situation is temporary during a transition period in a product that
    Bobbi is working on.
    
    /. Ian .\ 

    I echo the previous two replies.  Having been in a similar situation
    quite recently, where local mgmt was tunnel-visioned and not looking
    out for any company interests or employee interests, merely bottom-
    line revenue interests, I urge you to employ ODP.  The highest mgmt
    at the local level didn't help, but using ODP to its fullest (almost)
    extent, the situation was brought to another corporate VP and it
    finally got straightened out.
    
    I can't believe that if a senior VP (as in your case) *really* knew
    the extent of what was going on, would allow it to continue.  Anybody
    in a position like a senior vp didn't get there by being an airhead.
    Maybe *that's* the person you need to schedule some time with?
    
    Jon

I've got to agree with the last few notes.  I'd be very interested to hear
how the VP worded their dictum to your manager.  Was the wording really 
something like "no matter how much they kick, scream and threaten to leave the
company don't let them transfer" OR was it more like "do what it takes to get
the job done and I'll support you" OR was it something else?

I'll bet this VP never heard of Bobbi Fox or how she feels about everything.
I agree with Jon, try to schedule a meeting with the VP.  What's the worst it
can do?  However, if the meeting takes place, you had better be prepared to
state you case in a non-flaming way...

-mark

    The past several replies are all quite correct.  You must NOT give
    up!!
    
    It is vital that you maintain as professional a bearing as possible.
    It is critical that you understand the people to whom you are talking
    when you use the Open Door Policy.  They will not understand your
    situation unless you explain it clearly.
    
    As Mark said, do NOT flame.  State your case calmly and in terms
    that the people you are talking with can understand.  We should
    ALL have the best interest of Digital at heart.
    
    We must assume that the people making these APPARENTLY bad decisions
    do have Digital's best interests at heart.  Your goal should be
    to negotiate something that will be the best for you AND Digital.
    
    Hang in there, justice WILL be served in time,
    
    Don

    Fellow DECie's,
    I just couldn't resist the temptation to add a few "centimes" to
    this issue, which I believe demonstrates the purpose of this conference
    at it's best and to a further extend why there are 5-digit and lower
    badge numbers in this company feeling happy even without a "manager"
    in the job title.
    The last repies to 190 reflect exactly how I feel after 16 years
    in DEC: There are up's an down's, managers that "manage things"
    or administrate budgets, but there are also "leaders" who not just
    repeat KO's statements about "employees beeing our most important
    asset" etc. The "leader" type managers believe in them and reeinforce
    them ! The hard thing is to find them, but as the fellows say:
    "Keep going on with ODP, until you get to right person, be it KO"
    I guess without that lot of DEC'ies believing in that sort of DEC-spirit
    the company would never have gotten to what it is today. 
    As for this particular case, I seriously doubt that by forcing
    unmotivated people to finish up a job DEC would ever get a benefit
    out of it. These days the Egyptian whips and Roman lyons are not
    considered as beeing "motivating" any more !
    
    As I said, I just couldn't resist this flame !
    
    Fred

    I got to this note late (been working hard, no time for NOTES) so I can
    only echo .13.  DEC is no place for slavery.  (Actually, wasn't it
    outlawed some time ago?  At least in the U.S.A.?)  If the Senior V.P.
    is really determined to treat you as a slave you should leave DEC.  If
    it is just the local manager giving a ``liberal interpretation'' to a
    general expression of support by a senior VP, then his threat is empty
    and you can ignore it. 
    
    The ``hurry up'' job I was working on (which took me away from NOTES)
    supposedly had three (nameless) VPs behind it.  I went to another
    facility on very short notice to help solve a problem that had stumped
    the local folks.  I met with the manager and his troops, and we decided
    on a plan of attack, involving three parallel efforts.  A few hours
    into the process I found that the other two attackers had been pulled
    off the problem due to an edict from a (likewise nameless) VP.  I
    complained about losing my support, and got an apology from the manager
    plus the assignment of a junior person and a promise that one of the
    senior people that had been diverted would be able to give me some of
    his time.  Working together, in spite of these handicaps, we solved the
    problem.  In addition, I left the troops better with better tools for
    dealing with this kind of problem in the future. 
    
    The point of the above paragraph is not just to let off steam but also
    to illustrate something about VPs.  They were remote from this problem
    and the efforts of the people who were working on it. They made
    decisions which, from their viewpoint, undoubtedly made sense, and
    given their lack of detailed information I cannot fault them.  Their
    perspective is a general knowledge of the needs of many groups, and
    their job is to strike the right balance across a wide span, using only
    the somewhat heavy-handed tools which they posess.  These tools seem to
    us like arbitrary, almost capricious, decisions, since we don't see the
    wide scope of their responsibilities and don't appreciate the extent of
    their ignorance about any one aspect of what is happening under them. 
    
    Therefore, I agree with the previous recommendations: when faced with a
    situation like this the right approach is to confront the source of the
    unreasonable edict.  It may be that the manager is simply lying about
    his support from a senior VP.  More likely, he has interpreted
    something that the senior VP said in the way that maximally favors his
    personal goals.  Even if the senior VP has established a policy of
    slavery, confronting him is the right tactic. 
    
    I don't think it likely that anybody with a position of significant
    responsibility in the company has declared that, as mentioned in .7,
    certain employees are tied to their present jobs for nine months,
    regardless of their previous history.  After all, what is to prevent
    him from extending that time limit if (as is very likely in a slave
    economy) the project slips?  If there really is a senior VP who has
    done this, my advice would be to run.  Don't ask for severance pay,
    don't ask for pay in compenstaion for vacation you haven't taken, don't
    wait to pick up your last paycheck, don't even obviously clean out your
    desk--just fail to show up for work, move to some other part of the
    country, change your name and social security number, and never, never,
    get a job with DEC again.  When you are a slave, the only way you will
    achieve liberty is to become an escaped slave--promises by the
    slaveowner that things will get better are not to be trusted.  Once a
    slaveowner, always a (potential) slaveowner. 
    
    Sorry to make this so long-winded.  I take issues of personal freedom
    very seriously, and this note rang my bell. 
        John Sauter

    re: the issue... I believe that "terms of employment" cannot be
    imposed after the fact...
    
    re: the approach... Yes, ODP and keep good notes.
    
    good luck!
    Marge
    

    re .-1 "keep good notes"
    
    The best possible advice.  My experience with ODP has shown that
    if you have notes (ie, "event diary", copies of memos, mail, etc)
    you'll get alot further.  Many managers seem to take a dim view
    of an employee just saying "well, I said that, then he said that"
    type of approach.
    
    The "event diary" idea was proposed by a friend and proved to be
    invaluable; ie, "Nov 12th - Joe asks me to work all weekend", etc.
    
    Just a thought...
    Jon

    From what I can see "Is Personnel worth Anything" ??
    
    Joe
    

    Yes, sometimes Personnel is worth something -- and KEEP GOOD NOTES!
    
    On the one hand, I've found that CXO Personnel isn't in the business
    of identifying employees' strengths and helping them to find jobs
    that have matching requirements -- but MRO Personnel is.  I might
    feel that this affects the measurement of their relative worths.
    (They might not!)
    
    On the other hand, Personnel (and my manager) kept me from going
    down in flames when my prevoius manager turned in an uncomplimentary
    review on me and left DEC.  That was worth something to me....
    
    In this last situation, the manager who left had NOT KEPT GOOD NOTES.
    Mine weren't great, but they helped when I was really under stress.
    I think usually managers KEEP REALLY GOOD NOTES, especially when
    they expect their actions to lead toward (your) termination.  I
    hate CYA, you hate CYA, everyone hates CYA.  But do it!  A friend
    of mine who has given out "5" reviews remarked that ordinarily DEC
    managers don't like to do that -- it takes too much paperwork!
    
    KEEP GOOD NOTES -- especially if you find that Personnel is doing
    anything worthwhile :^)

I would like you to know that I handed in my resignation on 
Friday, October 24.

It was accepted by Richard Corley, Group Manager of the 
Health Care Industries Group, without any demur, thereby giving 
lie to the idea that I was _so_ indispensable to the group that 
my attempts to transfer should be blocked.

I realize that a person stronger than myself would have hung on 
and ODP'd it to K O if need be (while, of course, aggressively 
job searching outside the company).  However, the wear and tear 
of the everyday stress generated by the job and upper layers of 
management were such that I felt that I and my family could not 
sustain such an effort.  

This stress included attempts by a member of Corporate Personnel 
to discredit my work-related problems with the statement that 
I "obviously had some problem unrelated to work".  He "strongly 
suggested" I go to EAP, and then tried to perform a detailed probe 
about the state of my emotional health, such as pushing to know who 
initiated my divorce, trying to find out about my personal outside 
activities, etc.  This individual has direct contact and 
influence with the Sr. VP I mentioned before, so his "suggestion" 
feels more like an order.

I anticipate that I will be here the required thirty days, if not 
a bit more.  After that, I'm a free agent.  If anyone knows of any 
job or contract leads outside the company, or of anyone with 
an external hire opening that is willing to take a chance 
on a "trouble maker", please let me know  (See COOKIE::JOBS note 
567 for a brief rundown of who I am).

Thanks to those who have expressed support, either in this forum, 
or through personal messages.

Bobbi

"Do_what_is_right"_is_dead;_long_live_"I_want_mine"

    I regret that Bobbi has opted to leave Digital rather than fight
    this battle, but she must decide what is best for her.  I hope that
    someone else will decide to fight, and will win, before Digital
    loses too many more good people.
    
    I'm glad Bobbi was able to resign without any "demur".  Threatening
    her in order to keep her would have been well outside the bounds
    of ethical conduct in an employer.
    
    Good luck in your new job Bobbi.  Please keep in touch.
        John Sauter

    				-< Shame>-

                                                                                   
    What a shame for both BOBBI and DEC. It seems that unPERSONEL would
    only notHELP her out, but to pry into HER PERSONAL life as well. What
    kinda crap(no pun) is that!!!! It just reafirms my view of personel
    in DEC.... THEY STINK..... Thats a broad generalzation and I don't
    mean to include the people that DO CARE. It's just that they're
    far and few between. Also they're like a COP.. "Where are they when
    u need them"...
    
    Joe Crap
    
    PS: I did have a great personel REP, but ALAS .. she ws xfered..
    RATS !
    
    

    I'm not the greatest fan of the Personnel organization, but in their
    defense, I have seen many situations where they would honestly have
    liked to help right or prevent a wrong, but were powerless to do so.
    They do not have the authority to enforce the SPIRIT of P&P, only the
    letter of the law.  So when an unscrupulous manager violates the SPIRIT
    of that manual, but uses a "good ol' boy" network or some such
    mechanism instead of flagrantly breaking the rules, Personnel has
    absolutely no power whatsoever.  They stand by helplessly and watch.
    I've been a victim in such a situation, and the Personnel organization
    was extremely concerned but powerless to help. Unfortunately, even
    Digital isn't perfect... 
    
    							Pat

    I agree with Pat in .-1, and would like to add that I have seen
    in my own situation where the Personnel organization "moved mountains"
    when they realized that unscrupulous managers had not only violated
    the "spirit" of the law, but had flagrantly also violated the letter.
    
    I wish Bobbi could have hung in there, as I am still a firm believer
    in "do what is right".  Again from my own experience, I realize
    what a tremendous strain such a situation can be on the family.
    Not only have we lost a potentially good employee, Bobbi's old group
    and manager are still around claiming victory.  Assuming Bobbi's
    tale is accurate, this fact is indeed a shame.
    
    Jon

    Please read .21 again. I stated that it was a broad gerneralzation
    and that all personel was of that sort. Obviuosly they did nothing
    for BOBBI, but they (VP/PERSONEL) DID/WILL have to except her
    resignation! Why don't THEY find her a new job within DEC??? Answer
    that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
    
    I realize that personel does and can help... From this NOTE it seems
    to be going against them....
    
    
    Joe

     
     It doesn't seem fair to judge any of the people or organizations in
     the particular incident described in this topic, nor does it seem fair
     to extrapolate anecdotal experiences with individuals to the whole of
     DEC.  
     
     First, the information we have is from a single source.  I don't
     question the individual's veracity for a second, but people with
     different perspectives will often see the same event in different
     lights.  Rather than focusing on the merits of a specific case, we
     might be better off discussing whether the question of blocking
     potential transfers ought to be more fully addressed in the P&P
     manuals. 
     
     It also seems to be to be grossly unfair to castigate an entire
     organization (in this case, personnel).  If there are administrative
     policies that could be changed to make personnel more effective, let's
     find out what they might be; blanket criticisms are neither convincing
     nor productive. 
     
     --Mr Topaz     

    re: .25
    
    The only problem with what you say is that most of our opinions of
    Personnel are not based on anecdotal stories or single sources. As with
    many areas of our life, we form opinions based on a stream of stories,
    personal experiences, verified occurrences, etc. 
    
    So it's unreasonable to say that you can't castigate an entire
    organization.  You sure can, if you have enough data and have seen
    enough screw-ups. 
    
    Personnel has a not-so-hot reputation. Yes, we have only one viewpoint
    of the story in this topic, but given what I have seen of Personnel,
    it's entirely reasonable to believe it at face value.  (At some point,
    "but this particular story might be inaccurate" becomes "crying
    `wolf'".) 

RE: .25
  > Rather than focusing on the merits of a specific case, we might be
  > better off discussing whether the question of blocking potential
  > transfers ought to be more fully addressed in the P&P manuals. 

    The question of blocking potential transfers IS fully addressed in the
    P&P manual.  The problem is, it's all too easy to get around it. What
    if, for example, the blocking manager calls the hiring manager and
    appeals to him/her not to hire his oh-so-valuable employee.  And
    hints around that the project he's getting ready to undertake for
    the hiring manager probably will get placed on the back burner if
    he loses this employee.  Or some such thing -- there are a million
    ploys in the "good ol' boy" network.  That's the sort of thing that
    Personnel cannot stop.  The hiring manager withdraws the job offer,
    and no rules have been broken.
    
    It happens.
    
    							Pat

    Once again I say to look at -.21.... I said [I repeat] that not
    all people in personel are like this and NOT all MGR's are either!
    I still think from I/P I have recieved in my area and from around
    the company isthat PERSONEL has a bad REP. And as the TV commercial
    goes "THEY EARNED IT!!!!" The question is can THEY CHANGE it. Not
    by giving away the store but by not being a RUBBER STAMP for MGMNT!!
    
    Joe
    

        Personally, I've never had anything but good experience with
        Personnel, exclusive of their timeliness in getting me hired.
        (I actually recieved my first offer of a job at DEC through
        inter-office mail! I guess they figured anybody with a badge
        and an office desereved a job or something.)
        
        I imagine there are two reasons for this. First of all, I'm an
        optimist. I expect things to work out. It has been my experience
        that if you look for trouble you will find it. If you feel
        picked on the world dumps on you. It seems to me that our
        outlook colors both our interpretation of how well the world
        treats us and how well it *actually* treats us.
        
        The second reason is that I have work for more than 9 of my 10+
        years at DEC in central  engineering and as an engineer. This
        part of the company really does seem to work better than many
        others, and especially so for engineers. 
        
        In any event, Personnel has always been very helpful to me,
        and usually solved my problems. Just thought I'd say a few
        words on the other side.
        
        JimB.

    Two "centimes" worth from Europe:
    With more than 16 years with DEC my experience is the following:
    I never got anything more from them (as a group,department,....)
    than you might expect from a Social Security Dept.,Court clerk.....
    when trying to explain them your particular problem.
                      HOWEVER
    I did get help from individuals within, who really tried hard to
    do more than look and interpret the various manuals, sometimes by
    even bending somewhat the established rules to do the "right thing".
    The problem might be that as Personnel does have that not so good
    reputation, they never stay too long in their jobs, not to speak
    about progressing in their careers. On the other hand personnel
    complains about lack of recognition, no decision-power etc....
    Sounds like the "dog_byting_his_tail_story"
    
    Fred