Human Resources

Like any other department that provides services within a university (e.g. information technology, cleaners, facilities management), Human Resources (HR) is there to help your department carry out its role.

For staff members with employment problems of their own, therefore, I believe there are a few points to consider:

• HR may be reluctant to provide advice to you that's inconsistent with what your boss regards as the necessary outcome for your department. (It appears to me that fairness often takes a backseat to cost savings, speed and administrative expedience.)
  
• But even if HR recommended an arrangement favourable to you, your boss may not agree. (I doubt that HR would tell you that.)
• HR's interpretations of the relevant industrial instruments (agreements, awards, legislation, policies) may differ from those of the Union. (It appears to me that HR's interpretations are often less advantageous to staff than the Union's.)
  

Don't misunderstand, this isn't about HR staff — just like you and me they're simply doing the jobs they were hired to do.

If it appears that you may have a disagreement with your boss or your department, then I suggest that you first contact the Union. Then, if HR needs to be contacted the Union can do that.

(So, if you're not in the Union — join.) ▪

Perspective is worth 80 IQ points.
—Alan Kay (b. 1940)

Academic dishonesty - recycling

Leveraging your work is smart, but you need to know where the edges are.

If, for example, you present a paper at a conference in Sydney, then, it seems to me, it shouldn't be the same paper you presented last year in Melbourne (albeit with a different title). Similarly, your Office of Research would probably be disappointed to learn that those two presentation entries in your research profile are really about one paper (presented twice). And, your Head of School/Department might also be disappointed to hear that those two round-trip airfares were both used to present one paper (twice).

(Such "recycling" can be academic dishonesty, but it's a nonsense to suggest that it's "self-plagiarism." There isn't such a thing. If it's wholey your own work, then it's not plagiarism.)

If there's a definitive guide on this subject, I'm unaware of it. Usually where academic dishonesty is addressed it's directed to student behaviour (the Northwestern Univeristy guide is an example.)

If you have a mentor who can lead you through the issues you're lucky. Offices of Research and Heads of School can be helpful in providing advice that will keep you away from trouble (but may vary in helping you to maximise the effect of you work). ▪

Only God can make a tree,
but only Mayor Daley can make a park.
—Chicago aphorism

Bcc: Hazards

The hazards of using "Bcc" (blind carbon copies) on emails are many:

• Bcc recipients may not realise that they received the email as a Bcc.
• In some email clients when a Bcc recipient makes a "reply to all," it does just that.
• In any case, your Bcc recipients aren't obliged to maintain the confidentiality that you may think your communication is owed.
• There are countless ways for a forwarded Bcc to make a 'tour' and end up identifying the Bcc recipient.
• When you put something sensitive in an email, you're putting it in writing.
• It's often the distribution list that moves 'upset' over email content to anger.
• Content that might be justified as a private communication between two people could be defamation when published by email.

Ask yourself, if the 'open' recipient(s) knew about the Bcc recipient(s) would they be upset? If the answer is yes, think twice.

If you must send a copy in confidence, a (slightly) better tactic is to send the email and then forward a copy to the other party. This affords you an opportunity to explain why your sending it, makes it clear that it's a special copy, and prevents a "reply to all" disaster. ▪

They call it the beaten path —
but if you want to see a beating, try leaving it.
—Yllib Ybnad (b. 1948)