|
|||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Voted Off the Job
Ordinary working Americans soon will have an opportunity for HR role-playing at the expense of a co-worker -- who they will fire on national television. Meet the contestants of a controversial new reality show aptly named "Someone's Gotta Go." One word that has been used to describe the spirit of this program is schadenfreude, which Webster's defines as "enjoyment obtained from the troubles of others." Critics wonder how it could possibly pass for entertainment at a time of rising unemployment. "I think it's outrageous and cheap TV," says John Challenger, CEO of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc., a leading outplacement consulting firm in Chicago. "Losing your job is one of worst life crises along with death and divorce, and to do that in a public way for something that essentially should be private and preserve that person's dignity just seems really wrong." But Matt DeLuca, an HR generalist for Rivington House and adjunct associate professor of management at New York University, believes the show's format could serve as a teachable moment if it doesn't degenerate into a popularity contest. It could result in a more democratically run organization, he says. "When times get tough and somebody is threatened with the possibility of a layoff, it's really a wake-up call and frequently people don't wake up until it's too late," DeLuca says.
No Worse Than the News? Each week "Someone's Gotta Go" will showcase a different cash-strapped company, with about 15 to 20 employees, that agrees to open its books and divulge everyone's salary so employees can make an informed decision about who should be fired. Mike Darnell, chief of alternative programming at Fox, recently told the Associated Press: "I feel that it's part of the times that we are living in. It's certainly no worse than watching the news every night and hearing all the statistics and watching what is happening. "To be frank," he says, "like all these shows, if you don't want to watch, don't watch it." His credits include the infamous "Temptation Island," in which couples test their fidelity, and the cancelled special "O.J. Simpson: If I Did It, Here's How It Happened." The idea for "Someone's Gotta Go" was hatched after Darnell saw a news report about a company where an indecisive boss let employees fire one of their own. Fox developed the show with Endemol USA, which produces "Big Brother," "Kid Nation" and "Fear Factor." The show's publicist said no one from the network would comment until closer to the scheduled air date, which had not yet been announced. While it's customary for reality-show contestants to sign a release form waiving their right to sue, there are loopholes in the employment law area, explains Paul Navarro, a partner in the labor and employment department of McGuireWoods in Charlotte, N.C. "You can waive existing claims and things that happened in the past, but you cannot waive rights going forward," he says. There's also the possibility of a defamation suit being filed. He says many states have some protections in place to talk with co-workers about job performance, but airing grievances on national TV could be considered excessive -- resulting in a loss of that privilege. Even the Fox network runs the risk of being labeled a co-conspirator in a wrongful termination lawsuit if the plaintiff claims it aided and abetted unlawful activity on the part of the employer, he says.
Fear of Hyperbole Paul Falcone, a 20-year HR veteran based in Los Angeles who once worked for Nickelodeon and Paramount Pictures, fears "Someone's Gotta Go" will hype any unfolding drama rather than focus on legitimate business reasons and meaningful analysis of job tenure, performance reviews, code of conduct, education considerations, race, age, gender and other factors. Lori Zaret, executive vice president of human resources for Exchange Bank in Santa Rosa, Calif., has decidedly mixed feelings about the show. "On the surface, it sounds like tasteless exploitation of an unfortunate set of circumstances," she says. "But the flip side is if someone is going to lose their job, anyway, maybe the individual who's impacted will get some sort of financial reward that serves as a cushion and makes the situation that much better for them." Fox has indicated that whoever gets laid off will receive a small severance, but declined to say whether the network or producers would provide any additional compensation. Certainly one could argue that compassionate viewers might reach out with job offers or other gestures. Another scenario is that the fired employee could attempt to use his or her prime-time exposure as a launching pad for other television appearances or a second career. There's also the issue of bias to consider. "Let's face it," Zaret says, "if you've got a handful of individuals who are deciding among themselves who will lose their job and they could be among the ones who will be negatively impacted, there are a lot of personal agendas at play -- just like any other reality show that features friendships or alliances, which happens enough in business, anyway, with co-workers and sometimes managers."
April 21, 2009 Copyright 2009© LRP Publications |
||||||
Print
Email
Write to the Editor
Reprints
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
© Copyright 2010 LRP Publications. All rights reserved.
|
||||