The phrase “Bura Na Mano” is often followed by frustrations that one might feel can offend the other. In a workplace, especially, employees often have grievances that they wish they could tell their HR without causing offense
A free “get out of jail” card, if you will. In the name of politeness, though, honesty often gets lost and only increases frustration.
As such, this Holi, let “Bura Na Mano” become a workplace metaphor for what people want to say, and hear what HR might have to say about it.
“Bura na mano, but… Just because it’s policy doesn’t mean it’s fair”
Employees wish HR would admit:
Some policies are outdated, performative, or disconnected from reality. Often, policies cause more work than the actual task at hand. With the world evolving by the day and priorities shifting fast, can HR not adapt to the same?
HR wishes employees understood:
HR are enforcers of policies, not the maker. Policies are often constrained by leadership, compliance, and cost. They are not kept in place simply due to indifference. The policies that hamper employees also challenge HR. However, policy modification is far from being as simple as many employees might think.
Underlying tension
The debate in this case is about fairness vs feasibility. While employees want certain policies to evolve and become fairer, HR wants to say that rapid policy adoption requires participation from areas beyond leadership.
“Bura na mano, but… Flexibility isn’t a perk anymore. It’s the baseline”
Employees wish they could say:
Hybrid work, flexibility, and autonomy aren’t privileges. With connectivity at one’s fingertips and work increasingly centred on one’s work laptop, is a flexible work environment really out of reach?
HR wishes employees realised:
Flexibility still needs accountability and structure. For HR, a widespread workforce requires greater investment in resources to keep things running smoothly. From counting hours to aligning schedules, flexibility benefits employees, but it also adds to HR’s workload to ensure that work performance isn’t impacted.
Underlying tension
The flexibility debate ultimately focused on trust vs control. Where employees want HR to trust them more and allow for easier working conditions, HR cannot do so without restrictions, at risk of losing control and order within the workforce.
“Bura na mano, but… Mental health can’t just be a poster on the wall”
Employees wish HR would stop:
Talking about wellbeing without changing workloads or deadlines is not truly dealing with mental health. Yes, HR has many mental health initiatives in place. But what use are they when not implemented properly and effectively?
HR wishes employees saw:
Support systems exist in a company, but HR can’t be the only one to enforce them. Leadership and employees themselves need to become champions of mental health for the policies in place to work. For mental health policies to become more than posters on the wall, managers also need to take a good look at how their work style and expectations are affecting their employees.
Underlying tension
The core debate regarding workplace mental health policies is about intent vs impact. When policies have no impact on employees’ actual mental health, the intent itself becomes questionable. With no proper enforcement or improvement, one has to wonder if the policies are merely lip service or are meant to create a truly positive work environment.
“Bura na mano, but… Feedback without action is just noise”
Employees wish HR knew:
Surveys about workplace expectations and conditions without a visible follow-up kill trust faster than no survey. Worse than no feedback might be the feeling that your words are being heard but ignored. What use are any complaints or suggestions when they are as effective as screaming into a void?
HR wishes employees understood:
Change is slow, political, and often incremental. It might not seem fair, but rushed policies can lead to bigger issues down the road, exacerbating the existing issue rather than curing it. A policy change and implementation require input from various levels of the company, consideration of legalities, and long-term feasibility.
Underlying tension
Any policy change needs to find the right balance between speed and sustainability. Addressing any issue quickly is ideal, but a rushed job can create more friction. The ideal path, in this case, is a collaborative discussion that hears the employees out and pitches the company’s own reservations without ignoring the highlighted concerns.
“Bura na mano, but… We want transparency, not corporate comfort language”
Employees wish they could say:
With the changing work landscapes, the “sofer” words only increase frustrations. Why not simply say “layoffs” instead of “rightsizing”? Why not call it “budget cuts” instead of “restructuring”? Is a comfort language truly more important than being transparent about the actual issues?
HR wishes employees remembered:
Language is sometimes chosen to minimise panic. The intent behind such words is not to deceive but to convey the intentions in a manner that invites dialogue. The soft words might seem frustrating to some, but even a simple word change can reflect the company’s values. A comforting approach showcases that, despite the tough times, HR remains eager to help its employees in any way that it can. It highlights that HR understands the sensitive nature of the matter and is wary of causing more hurt and frustration.
Underlying tension
The debate between honesty and comfort when converting bad news is not limited to the workplace. This is where sensitivity plays a crucial role in communication. While HR should always maintain a transparent approach, it doesn’t require it to be blunt.
Bura Na Mano…
Most of the grievances employees have with HR stem from a sense of unfairness. When employees feel frustrated or roadblocked by the company’s policies, they can’t help but ask HR just why things are the way they are.
For HR, it becomes hard to balance employee expectations versus company policies. As much as HR wishes it could solve all the problems employees bring to it, it, too, is bound by company rules and leadership choices.
A healthier workplace should adopt the softer approach of “Bura Na Mano.” Grievances, when communicated properly, can help address even the gravest issues. After all, healthier workplaces are built when HR and employees stop talking around issues and start naming them
