revtothelimit - motorbike forum

head of is good but usually constitutes a target

Potter wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 2:04 pm
Engineering Lead would be ok, or Lead Engineer,

I tell people I'm a Lead Engineer 'cause I fix church roofs.

Very few people get my hilarious joke.

Potter wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 2:24 pm The HR woman said no because "he's just an Engineer", but I knew that he had a lot of management experience even if it didn't say so in his title.

It's a common misconception amoung HR IME, it's also stupid. In order to get chartership through the UK engineering council you have to have managerial skills anyway. Specifically...

Clear evidence of line management and/or project management, responsible for technical and non[technical staff, significant budgetary control, staff development and training,delegation, problem solving, clear understanding of quality, risk assessment etc.

or

Responsible for a number of technical and non-technical staff either as a line manager or within a project management environment, staff development, problem solving and probably limited budgetary control. Responsible for managing a project though its entire life cycle, the project may be small or more complex. Planning and personal supervision of team based projects in research and/or development programmes or problem investigation. Such teams are likely to be multidisciplinary and may include personnel from outside the company.

Those two descriptions are what you need to get level 4 and level 3 in "Competence C - Techical and Commercial leadership". You have to get level 3 or 4 to be chartered.

Chief Experience Officer (CEO)

I don't believe HR are targeting me as an individual or looking to prevent further promotion or pay rises. The company acquired about 5 other firms over the last 3 years and they are trying to standardise a lot of things, not just job titles, but one of the standards coming across the pond from corporate HQ is "Manager = people manager". All good points and input from everyone, thanks for that. As I said there are some big changes ahead so we'll wait and see what happens with the bigger picture.

Potter wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 2:04 pm I would also personally avoid anything with "Senior" in the title, because it's usually the token title they give to people that they won't promote but they want to throw them a carrot, not always, but it's often used as that.

In some businesses, particularly those aligned with Civil Service type banding, it's just that.

Ours goes
Job
Senior job
Principle job

Then that loosely aligns to pay scales, responsibilities and rates.

This is going to be hilarious for the place that I work (just been taken over by a US firm) as 90% of our employees have manager in the job title, despite not managing any people.

Horse wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 4:11 pm

Potter wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 2:04 pm I would also personally avoid anything with "Senior" in the title, because it's usually the token title they give to people that they won't promote but they want to throw them a carrot, not always, but it's often used as that.

In some businesses, particularly those aligned with Civil Service type banding, it's just that.

Ours goes
Job
Senior job
Principle job

Bet it doesn't.

slowsider wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 5:49 pm

Horse wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 4:11 pm

Potter wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 2:04 pm I would also personally avoid anything with "Senior" in the title, because it's usually the token title they give to people that they won't promote but they want to throw them a carrot, not always, but it's often used as that.

In some businesses, particularly those aligned with Civil Service type banding, it's just that.

Ours goes
Job
Senior job
Principle job

Bet it doesn't.

We're very sensible and serious people, we have principals, you know.

Potter wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 2:04 pm You're a manager if you manage things and processes, your HR sound like they either don't have a clue, or they're trying to downgrade you.

That ^

That's very annoying. I was about to refer to @Potter's post from earlier - if you're going to refer to yourself as "Principle" anything, you really ought to spell it correctly, or you'll never get that promotion. It's a matter of principal, see.

Now Horse has stolen my thundery wit.

There are many oddities in the NHS, but one is our pay terms and conditions. We have a payment umbrella called ‘Agenda for change’ ( you can look it up- the scales are freely available). The higher up the scale, the greater the expectation that you have management and then leadership skills and capabilities.

For technical roles, particularly now with niche skills- you have to open your wallet. That means we might have to pay tall money for someone that might have zero or limited leading skills- but their pay puts them on our scale at a leadership level IYSWIM.

What this also means is that if your role doesn’t have the right words in it- when HR ( who won’t understand your role) go to desktop it for its banding, it might misrepresent your abilities etc.

Personally, I’d hard swerve anything with ‘senior’ in the title- these get overlooked by those in actual senior roles and kind of reflect the ceiling that person is operating at.

I’ve the quirk of both being a ‘chief’ and a ‘director’ - both are relevant in their own way, but mostly I introduce myself as a nurse still.

We have ‘leads’ who have no direct reports. Heads of/ managers all have direct reports and are involved in the transaction weeds of doing.

So personally I’d have (blank) lead or (blank) Officer ( I’m also one of those and it sounds proper wanky) - but make sure the JD and PS are actually where you describe wtf you do.

Senior Head IT consultant

Or shitcunt for short

Technically, my title is ‘Member’

Potter wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 8:22 am

wheelnut wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 7:40 am Technically, my title is ‘Member’

Large?

Unfortunately not.

IMO anyone who thinks of a person as a Human Resource really needs to have a look at themselves and think about what the term Human Resource implies.

yeah, the more progressive companies call it 'People' or PLD, 'People, Learning and Development', but everyone still refers to them as HR.

Oldies use 'personnel'

Our new (U.S.) parent company calls it Talent Management. Fair made me wince. Why are they such wankers? I don't want to be a human resource or have my talent managed - just feck orf!

DefTrap wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 12:52 pm Our new (U.S.) parent company calls it Talent Management. Fair made me wince. Why are they such wankers? I don't want to be a human resource or have my talent managed - just feck orf!

Yup, and they call their HR team, the Talent Acquisition Team. <groan>