I'm contracting in an organisation which is well-known to be dysfunctional in many ways. We have new chief exec who clearly has a mandate and the attitude to sort all the madness out. I suspect he'll succeed but it's going to be painful. Lots of fearful game-playing people will resist the change...
Either way, after 17 years in marketing, as a communications planner and a very good track record of delivering good quality strategic work, my latest role has me doing financial admin - filling in forms and getting them signed so we can pay someone some money.
it's neither appropriate for my skill set, experience or in the job description. I'll look like a really weak candidate for my next role if that's what I tell them I acheived in this role.
The line manager who insists I do this has had all her direct reports leave her and is known to be useless at dealing with anything which requires her to make a decision which requires any kind of pushing back at more senior people. But like lots of big corps, this very obvious problem's not being dealt with.
In 3 weeks time, a big re-org comes through so with luck I'll get a more appropriate role, but I'm not betting on it. If I'm asked to continue with the budget admin I want to refuse on the basis it's not appropriate for my experience or skill set and is effectively a misuse of company money as they pay me a rate which is appropriate for my 17 years and proven ability as a marketing planner.
Question is, how to best argue this with HR. I suspect they'll go for the easy option and say like it or lump it. In which case I'm off.
But I like working here most of the time and the change we're going through should give me the opportunity to do some interesting stuff - so I'd rather stay...
How best to get HR to be adult about this, listen to my valid concerns and help me find an appropriate role?