Some “helicopter parents” are now “co-piloting” their children’s careers, joining them for interviews and calling hiring managers on their behalf, The Wall Street Journal reported Aug. 2.
It is not unheard of in healthcare, human resources leaders at hospitals and health systems across the country told Becker’s.
According to the Journal, it is occurring across industries. In one instance, the mother of a 24-year-old who was fired from his construction job called Steven Clark, the COO of a Fairbanks, Alaska-based staffing firm, to plead for her son to be rehired.
With Generation Z now comprising nearly a fifth of the U.S. workforce, recruiters and leaders told the Journal the occasional ride-along to a job interview has turned into “full-on ‘career co-piloting,'” according to Jasmine Escalera, head career coach at résumé templates service Zety. It is becoming more common for parents to apply for jobs on their children’s behalf or join them in job interviews.
“The first time it happened, I was appalled,” Mr. Clark said about receiving calls from parents about their children’s interview process. “Since then, it’s become more of a here-we-go-again reaction.”
While some health system CHROs told Becker’s they have not personally experienced parents getting involved in their children’s application, interview or review process, several said it has occurred once or twice, or more. Most commonly, CHROs said they have experienced parents calling them regarding their child’s job application.
Tom McCauley, CHRO of Aspen (Colo.) Valley Health, said he has encountered this twice in more than 30 years in HR, and the two situations were starkly different. In one case, a candidate arrived with both parents, which Mr. McCauley read as a cultural nuance and handled with grace, asking the family to wait in the lobby for the duration of the interview. The second was a clearer example of overreach, with a parent actively inserting herself into the process.
“I don’t think that we as parents could do our children a bigger disservice than to be that involved,” Mr. McCauley said. “It does not reflect well on the parent nor the candidate, and while I’m sure the motives were well-intended, if we rob our children of the brand-shaping experience of totally bombing an interview, we’re actually stunting their growth as a young professional.”
At San Diego-based Scripps Health, Eric Cole, senior vice president of HR, said his team has not seen parents participate in interviews directly but has encountered situations in which parents contacted the organization about their adult child’s application. Shannon Levesque, CHRO of Nashua-based Southern New Hampshire Health, told of a parent calling to contest a decision not to hire her adult child.
Kendrick Russell, CHRO of University Medical Center of Southern Nevada in Las Vegas, said the situation is rare at his organization, with one instance in the past year involving a parent asking about application status. Mr. Russell added that over his career, similar inquiries have more often come from spouses or significant others than from parents.
On the question of whether this is a newer phenomenon, HR leaders offered nuanced views. Ms. Levesque distinguished between long-familiar forms of parental support, such as résumé help, interview coaching or a personal referral through a shared contact, and what she has witnessed more recently.
“That still happens today,” she said of traditional advocacy. “What’s unusual is the parent with no ties to the organization calling into HR to not only advocate for their adult child, but in some cases, to refute the hiring decision, and demand to know reasons why their family member was not selected for hire.”
Mr. Russell tied the pattern to labor market conditions. With postings now drawing more than 100 applicants in many cases, qualified candidates are being passed over at higher rates than in recent years, and that frustration may be prompting families to act.
“I believe it is something that has always existed, but perhaps in the tighter job market we are experiencing right now, it’s beginning to occur more often,” he said. “Due to the ample workforce supply for many positions, employers seem to be holding firm that candidates meet and exceed the minimum requirements, which wasn’t the case just a few years ago.”
Mr. Cole agreed that parental involvement in employment-related matters has become more noticeable in recent years. Mr. McCauley said he has not personally encountered a live example in eight to 10 years and considers it uncommon today.
All four leaders pointed to privacy and confidentiality as the principle that guides their response, regardless of the parent’s intent. Employment matters belong between the organization and the individual, they said, and that boundary does not move.
“As with many HR matters, confidentiality is non-negotiable,” Ms. Levesque said. “It is incredibly important that we respect the confidentiality of the individual we are working with, in all circumstances. Reinforcing that position with the parent in question is often enough to redirect their questions back to the place they belong, between the parent and their adult child.”
For situations that escalate, she advised HR leaders to consult legal counsel before agreeing to engage further.
Mr. Cole described a similar approach at Scripps, thanking parents for their interest while making clear the organization works directly with the applicant or employee alone.
“Maintain a professional and respectful approach while consistently reinforcing that the organization can only partner directly with the applicant or employee,” he said. “Establishing and communicating clear boundaries helps protect privacy, ensure fairness, and maintain the integrity of the recruitment and employment process.”
Mr. Russell said his team treats these situations as it would any request for confidential information, guided by company policy and applicable law. University Medical Center of Southern Nevada also introduced service-level agreements within its HR department that he said have helped reduce unsolicited inquiry calls. Applicants who clearly do not meet posted requirements, for example, are now notified by email within 72 business hours of a posting closing.
Mr. McCauley’s advice: physically separate the parties as soon as a parent appears, and hold the line from there.
“The second the application starts, it’s only the candidate. Period,” he said. “And even more so with an interview. We will inform others of how our process will unfold, so under no circumstance would I allow a parent into that situation. If you’re the candidate, your parents are not helping you. If you’re a parent, you may think you are, but you are not helping your child.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.