HR Musings on the May 19 Elections: My Point of View

Days ago, I participated in TwitterSpace discussion on the topic: Should HR Campaign for a Political Candidate? days ago.

I have an active Twitter Account (@joyalosbanos) since 2014 and posted mixed statement ranging from rants (which I have stopped since - really), HR/OD to cat pictures, limited to a few letters (140 or less). You need to be concise if not straight to the point talking because of the limits it imposed.

To those hiding under the socmed rock/deep ocean, Twitter Space is a new feature where you can talk any topic under the sun and it is not recorded (unless you are smart to record conversations) or saved. To be able to join the discussion, you need to have a Twitter Account to speak or listen.

Allow me to summarize the points here (please note that I am still a political neutral person here in fact - two of the participants are in the different spectrum aka the other side - think pink. Sonnie Santos and I were keeping our cards inside our sleeves so to speak).

First Point:

It is ok for HR to take a stand for its political belief and campaign for his/her choice. Even if I have been taking the other way - it is still a stand.

I listen to anyone's Point of View - whether you are for Leni, Bong Bong, Manny, Ping, Isko, Leody - without being judgmental. By taking this stance makes me less threatening to others. This also means that people cannot pin me towards one particular politician.

I can also throw a political statement/shade every now and then on my Facebook page without being singled out by someone within the sphere of friends. Mind you, I am loyal to the Philippines not to some politician.

Second Point:

I am still politically agnostic, But I exercise my right to choose who I feel deserves my vote. But unlike the others, I do not openly endorse someone.

I have maintained this since 1986 when my late cousin harassed my late grandmother for her political stand and I came to nearly hurt him in the process (my grandmother had a stroke prior to this and he was god damn drunk and feeling so morally high and mighty that day). I was front and center during that heated discussion.

To clarify further I was not of voting age that incident happened, but that experience shaken my view immensely.

End of story - itinakwil ako ng relatives ko over my reaction. I am labelled Persona Non Grata - because of what I did for almost a year until my sweet Lelang (Grandma in Chinese) died in December. This was before the term CANCEL CULTURE came into existence.

Now you know why I keep my political stand as silently as possible.

Third Point:

As an HR Practitioner, you need to maintain your objectivity despite having difference in opinion with the rest of the employees.

HR must maintain or take a Middle of the Road (MOR) approach since we are viewed as person of influence in the organization.

If you are forcing the employee (think ramming this to their throats) to accept your political choice, it does not bode well towards you or will think and see you differently. Like I said, it is okay to openly say you are supporting a candidate - but sensibly.

You have to advocate respecting each employee's political views and stances - even if it does not align with yours. You need to be at least impartial towards them, listening to their reason (no matter how you view it) and open to the fact that they will stick to their guns should someone openly criticize them of their choices.

Once you openly criticize their candidate, then respect towards your position is compromised. As Edwin Ebreo stated: It is within the rights of sharing and persuading your populace. The boundaries should be clear and should not violate employee rights to make a choice based on their belief.

As mentioned in one of the comments in that discussion initiated by Sonnie Santos, HR can help them guiding them to assess each candidate, their political platform and other political aspect in a non-political way to guide them in making a choice.

Remember: Diversity may not only mean differences in education, upbringing, sexual orientation and values but also the political affiliation and belief of every single employees in the organization.

Fourth Point:

At the end of the day, this is a one time (or should I say 1 1/2 month until a winner emerges) exercise of our right to suffrage or choose our next leaders to manage us for the next 6 years.

Whoever wins will lead us whether you like or don't like the new person in Malacanan by July 2022. We are taking six years here and it can be costly depending on our collective choice or what the majority decides.

Fifth Point:

HR for most part can assess the qualification of the candidates similar to recruiting people in the company says one of our participants.

While it is true that we in this profession can review and determine candidates qualified for any vacancies; therefore use this (for assessing our choices for the Philippine President), I had to correct him that we also fall for recruitment biases when assessing people for vacancies and therefore not accurate.

Let me end this blog by quoting this statement from a banner (in Tagalog) I saw whilst doing my routine weekend warrior mode:

Paalala: Ang Gobyerno ay Tao, Ang Tao ay Gobyerno, Ang Politiko ay Hindi Gobyerno.