To expect HR to inform IT of new starters?

[00100001]

I work in the IT Department of a college, and we always have new staff wandering into the office asking for usernames.

HR never let us know.

AIBU to expect HR to let us know that "Mr John Smith has started work on 01 January 2015 as a Teacher of a subject"?

If there is a procedure that HR are not following, how is that the OP's fault? IT departments are not there to be treated like slaves at the whim of the "important" people. Procedures about things like this exist for a reason.

If HR don't ask you to create an account, don't do it. Refer new starts back to whoever is supposed to create the requests. Eventually they will get the message.

Agree with kidlorne completely! I work in a support function too - we are here to support the organisation within the procedures that greater minds have designed.. not to run around wiping everyone else's arses for them!

Me: "Well, some one on Mumsnet said it's OK, HR have no need to inform anyone about new staff, it's enough that they say they work here. HR shouldn't be the people to tell us if Mr Smith works here or not.

Yep - that sounds pretty ridiculous I agree....so why are you posting this on mumsnet? You don't seem to be willing to take up some of the practical ideas you're being offered here....

No. The tech solution does not exist.
A tech option exists.
But it isnt working.
An alternative that works needs to be found.
That's why i suggested a change to the system that forces a notification if they want to, i dunno, process the new employee for payroll or something.

What you have is not working. Yes they should do it. But should isnt helping you because they arent doing it.
So find a way to remove the choice.

Some of the ideas aren't practical though "Ring up them every week and ask" is not a practical solution.

A practical solution is what is already in place - the problem is they don't follow the procedure!!!

The NHS don't even do it, you'd think it would just be a standard thing wouldn't you!

Just send them away and tell them to request access via their manager or HR? Of course you shouldn't be providing logins to people wandering in off the street.

What have you done so far to rectify with HR?

Had a meeting with HR Manager?
Or discussed on email?

I would be arranging a meeting with the person in HR who's in charge and highlighting 1) current situation 2) the risks of the current situation continuing, including any costs, 3) solutions and 4) IT dept expectations.

If this hasn't happened, you can sit there and moan about it.

But dont you see that a procedure in place that is not being followed is not a practical solution. It is a procedure that is not working.
Yes it would work if they did it.
But they arent.
Its not working.
solutions work.
Nobody can tell you what will work. We arent in your job. But something will work . You have to find it.
You already know that what is currently in place is not fit for purpose.

I would suggest removing all access for the HR department, then using your initiative to hire new HR people who are able and willing to use the current procedures :)

What you want to do here is to quote the part of your contract that says HR would dismiss you if you allowed access without HR's notification and thus No matter how huffy they get, HR are the only ones that can resolve this. Either they let you give access to anyone or they follow the procedure. Not your circus, not your monkeys. End of.

I'm in IT. Our system: if you want to hire (as line manager, not HR) you fill in the joiner/mover/leaver form. This is a workflow form that triggers the various "new joiner" actions. Before the jml form is filled in, an appointment approval form is required (budget and headcount approval). If both aren't in place and suitably approved, IT does nothing.

I fail to see why this is a big deal. If they don't follow process and the new joiner is unapproved, say no. The forms aren't rocket science are they?

In every company I've ever been in HR have been a law unto themselves. The pp who said that HR talk to themselves and to Management have hit the nail on the head.

It is a parallel universe - truly a tick box department who always appear both unable and unwilling to allow anything to be done outside of their formal procedures. You need an urgent temp by tomorrow? No can do! Forms x y and z have to be signed by 3 different people and then it will take us 3 days to input 3 bits of information into the system.
Maybe then we'll think about it oh and they won't be paid for 2 months as we require a months notice to give them a payroll number.....

You've just described the IT department at our place peutêtre.

The pp who said that HR talk to themselves and to Management have hit the nail on the head.

HR are there to do one job. That job is to keep the company out of court.

If there were no laws forcing companies to do certain things, they would not employ HR in the first place.

Please never be fooled into thinking HR are there for the employee/s. They are not.

I have been integral into the System of getting some sort of official confirmation of people being employed.

I have met and spoken with HR on many imes, asking them that all they have to do is, when they send out a job offer, they just need to let IT and Security know.

In our organsisation this is what happens:
No line manager recruits. HR recruits. Line Mangers interview etc. all offers of employment are sent out by HR, all DBS checks, references, information gatehring etc is done by HR. Everythign to do with someone eing employed is done through HR.

So, this is why I think it's Unreasonable that they don't inform IT, Finance and Security.

They have many methods of doing this;
email
piece of paper in a pigeon hole
Using the HR database to fire off emails automatically
fill in a form
Good lord, I'd let them do it hieroglyphics if it actually mean they'd tell someone they've appointed!

All of the technical solutions work from a technical POV. They just don't bother telling us.

I really don't see what else I can do. :/

I have asked them nicely. Explained why we need confirmation. Put processes in place for them. Ring them up when Mr Smith wanders in and ask them for confirmation.

Short of ringing them up every week, what else can I do?

The admissions team send us confirmation of new students - because of similar problems. They inform IT, Teachers and SMG. Not hard. They do this when they send an offer out, or just before the beginning of terms.

The finance team let us know when budgets are available or submission deadlines.

The maintenance team let us know of planned works

IT let people know of planned downtime.

le tme ask you this; In your job, do you have to ask EVERY DEPARTMENT if they plan on doing something? No, of course you don't because it's their JOB TO TELL YOU.

Do you have time to ring every department once a week to ask them if there is anything you should no? Noooo, of course you don't

[and breathe]

go round to their office with a baseball bat

I get that it's maddening. I do. I'd have taken them all out by now [psycho emoticon] and you're sat there going wt F? how hard is it to do this? It would work brilliantly if you'd JUST FUCKING DO IT!!!!!!!

I understand. I do. It's not that I think you're wrong.

But - it's not working. They aren't doing it. You can say they should until the cows come home. It's not helping.

You need to step outside the whole system and look again.

It may require a big change.

If you're saying you are not permitted to make the decision to change the system to a more automated process that guided the user through all the steps and communicated with other departments automatically then fair enough. But it doesn't hurt to present that option to the decision makers and try to convince them of the benefits to the entire organisation of getting itself up to date with systems that are more integrated. If you're saying you're not able to create such a system then fair enough, see if you can find someone who can (I am not insulting you I just have no way of knowing what your skills are)

I'm not saying that you're wrong to feel frustrated. I think it's a testament to your patience that they're not all down at A&E having keyboards removed from their colons, but what you have is not working, so it's time to bin it entirely and think of something new.

Our desktop support team have a 2 week lead time for providing a machine / system accounts etc - if you tell them too late then tough. Do you have a similar SLA?

I think the too many options of how to do it may be adding to the problem rather than helping. can you not inform HR due to multiple errors from now on you will only accept info on one format at x days notice minimum. The when someone walks in aplogise and send then across to HR to get it done.

That's an extremely good point, littleducks. It's amazing how often '6 ways you could do it' ends up being 'doesn't get done at all', whereas 'it must be done this way and this way alone', often ends up getting done.

Weird, isn't it?

What littleducks said (from someone who manages the User Access team in a major blue chip organisation).

I'd also be sending out a communication to all line managers. It may not be their responsibility to inform IT... but it's their team that suffers if a member of staff can't work due to not having the right kit/access... And it's their team member that starts working for your company and is left with the first impression that no one cares enough to even get them what they need to get suck in on their first day.

Get the line managers chasing HR.

stuck in

My final point...

In all but a few rare cases, your company will have 4 weeks notice of a new employee start (while they work be in their old company). I'd be highlighting that to line managers/HR too and saying that anything less than 2 weeks notice will result in them not having the tools they need to do their job. I'd be getting the buy in of the HR Director and get them to send the communication to erroneous.... HR and line managers.

work notice

Everyone, not erroneous.

FFS

It's rubbish but not surprising tbh. If nothing happens it needs to go to exec level. IT Director to HR Director