Inscrivez-vous ou connectez-vous pour rejoindre votre communauté professionnelle.
Some argue against describing employees as human resources, human capital, or human assets. They claim that such terms are dehumanizing-i.e. they potray employees as if they were objects. What do you think?
What's dehumanizing is to be given minimum salary that gives us right to eat and barely rent a house, only. while bosses still get mad at the employee for being late5 minutes or underperforming if sick or stressed. Bosses are playing God with our fates. These terms are not needed for an employee to feel like a machine. Because employees in Lebanon for example are often treated as below machines. The only way i am to feel human is to be treated as partner. Like shareholders giving20 or30% of their capital shares to their employees as a partner "block". Yes my friend: Repent! These terms hurt!
Actually its like giving the due importance to humanity. Remember business is an artificial person independent to the owners of the business. This is what is called the corporate veil. A business itself is not human and speaks corporate language; for instance a customer is a customer whether it is an individual or company or a government or even a system generated revolving purchase order. A business knows three things only; Assets, Liabilities and capital. In this scenario paying attention to the human resource by coining a few terms for the concept is actually heartening. Hardcore professionals will always like to be labelled as the Human Capital of a business; it satisfies the vanity.
