Immigration is a word that conjures up all kinds of interest and opinions. When people find out what I do, I am usually barraged with questions, asked for opinions and input on the immigration issues facing the country. I have some pretty strong opinions about immigration - both legal and illegal but none have any bearing on what I do in my work. Three of my four grandparents were immigrants and am grateful that the system worked. Worked - past tense or at least was more transparent.

When problems arise (and they usually do) I work closely with our local congressman’s office and his DHS liaison (every office has one). There is a comment that replays in my head about process - that - sit down for this - the process was originally intended to be managed by the individual, without aid. I chuckled. No one in their right, or left, mind would ever think that this process could be navigated, successfully, without a host of attorneys, paralegals and consulates.

I had someone write and ask me to share some of my immigration experience and decided to do it over a series of postings. I am the Responsible Office for our Exchange Visitor program through the Department of State; coordinate all the H1b work visas and international travel, Permanent Residency applications and the easiest of them all, NAFTA - TN. I have a book full of unbelievable and hilarious stories, depending on your point of view. It’s also important to share how our border agents seem to be treating our internationals scholars as them come to the US to teach - some are terrific and some aren’t.

I have been doing this kind of work for ten + years and despite what people think, border patrol and immigration has always been a serious evolution. 9/11 catapulted the topic into mainstream and created TSA. It seemed to give wider latitude to consulates and border agents (and that isn’t a compliment). Decisions can be arbitrary without reason or explanation, and terribly inconsistent. There seems to be no accountability. and virtually no transparency.  A former law firm with whom I worked had runners who would visit two of our entry ports to see who was working the gates and staffing the offices. The agents working would determine the entry of the international visitor. This is not an uncommon practice.

In my administration, there are a couple of ground rules. We don’t pay bribes. Period. That can be a problem when dealing with some countries. We do however pay reciprocity fees and expedited fees. They are darn close to bribes, only paid to government officials, not individuals.

We do require our international colleagues to be responsible for their immigration status, paperwork and documents. When they leave the country without documents, and can’t get back in, it’s their problem (which quickly becomes mine) and it is also their expense. If a passport expires, it is not my problem. While I will provide support, it is their responsibility to know their individual country’s consulate rules, processing time and accessibility. Some require visitors to call a 900 number and pay for the call. Others require payment upfront before an appointment is extended. Others may close for local holidays. I can’t stay on top of each consulate around the world.

And people need to follow the rules. It isn’t optional. While higher education and its governance runs well on collaboration, discussion and compromise, immigration does not. It’s concrete, specific and as I say frequently, without a sense of humor.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this topic. Feel free to share or email.

This feels like a flashback, something that we were talking about in the 1970s … well maybe not that long ago but here we are STILL talking about this.

In the Grand Rapids Press, our local newspaper, there was an article in the business section about telecommuting. The article focused on how employees surveyed at Steelcase are concerned that telecommuting could HURT their careers.

More than 80 percent believe working away from the office increases morale for employees and reduces staff turnover.

Contrast to:

More than 70 percent of those surveyed felt their companies prefer them in the office to control the work environment and prevent a decline in productivity.

That’s crazy.

My employer strongly supports ‘alternative work schedules’ (both short term and annually reviewed) that can allow staff  to flex time as needed. We have core business hours that we require covered, but allow and support employees who have needs outside 8-5. Not all positions qualify for flex time but we do our best.

What the article doesn’t say is who was surveyed, their roles in the organization or when the survey was conducted. I would be curious to know the gender and length of service at Steelcase too . Regardless of the holes in the story, it did serve as a good reminder to make certain that our opportunities reflect our desires. And ensure that in our practices, we don’t inadvertently punish those who elect to flex.

Recently, I have had a number of people express interest into ‘getting into’ HR. Some times the inquiries are sort of irritating, as if you can pick this up like a cold, any time during a career. Honestly, this work requires SOME skill, flair, compassion, empathy, humor, education and experience.

These are ACTUAL experiences, ALL mine.  Where else do you see this?

Candidates
A candidate brings her imaginary friend to an interview and asks me for an extra chair.
An interviewing candidate informs me that geckos are climbing all over my walls during our interview. (That was probably an acid flashback)
A candidate brings Salary.com survey to the interview and advises me of what the proper offer will be.
Candidate defines working with a diverse community as gals, foreigners and Vietmanese. (check the spelling).
Candidate referred to himself in the third person for the ENTIRE INTERVIEW.

Employees
Employee likes to play Solitaire on the work computer and can’t figure out why that’s a problem. (Um, we don’t employ professional Solitaire players)
Employee doesn’t make it to work because it was just a day, “she didn’t feel like working.” Wow.
Employee didn’t understand the rebuke from a married colleague. Can we say stalker? (He didn’t last)
Two employees get into a fight over a paperweight.

Supervisors
Had a supervisor advise me on an employee problem, “well SOMEBODY needs to talk to her.” (Well dude, that would be YOU)
Had a supervisor want to allow a psycho- employee retract a letter of resignation. Um no.
Had a supervisor, advocating for an employee raise, tell me personally that she really didn’t want him to get anything. Really could I fire him? (Head shaking) WHAT??
Supervisor thinks we all need to ‘hug more.’ (Can we say harassment?)
Had a supervisor complain that our office thinks candidates just ‘fall out of the sky.” (Well actually, we keep them freeze-dried in the closet and when you call our office and place the order, we just add water).

(it’s almost as good as Monty Python)  Who WOULDN’T want this job?