Advertise on podcast: HR Voices

(with guest Heather Krueger, Chief People Officer at Engine) Two finalists. One spent three years at a household-name company, but joined after the IPO, once the hard part was over. The other spent three years living through a layoff, a near-collapse, and growth with no playbook, and has the less impressive resume to show for it. Leadership wants the logo. The hiring manager wants the person who has already proven they can function when everything’s on fire, and now has to win that argument with people who’ve only read the resumes. What you’ll hear in this episode: Why “are we hiring the logo or the person?” is really two different decisions, and why the biggest red flag in this scenario is how leadership is reasoning, not which candidate winsThe “how” questions that cut through polished, AI-assisted interview answers: how did you handle it when the roadmap changed three times in a quarter, or when everything was an emergency?How Heather uses interview transcripts and AI to map a new hire’s gaps against the job description, then builds the onboarding plan around those gaps, because the hiring manager owns the person’s success, not just the decisionWhat a 30-to-60-day “incubation period” of modeled behavior looks like, and how an operating rhythm helps leaders be shock absorbers instead of shock amplifiersWhy Heather reads LinkedIn more than resumes, hires non-HR people onto her HR team, and considers a realistic job preview the biggest gift you can give a candidateWhy an interview panel where everyone agrees might mean your assessment has a blind spotAbout Heather Kruger: Heather Kruger is Chief People Officer at Engine. She has led people teams through more than one high-growth company, so she knows how brutal the first six months of a scaling role can be. She’s skeptical of resumes, a fan of hiring HR people who didn’t start in HR, and runs her people function like a product org: if employees don’t feel the value, it’s just a tax. HR Voices is a podcast by AllVoices, the AI-powered employee relations platform for HR teams who handle the hard stuff. Learn more at allvoices.co.

(with Adam Goldman, CHRO at Cacique Foods) Your step-count challenge got a standing ovation from the exec team. It also passed legal review as ADA compliant. And it’s quietly telling employees with disabilities to choose between disclosing private health information, begging for an exemption, or paying more than their coworkers. Unwinding it without torching a program leadership loves is harder than it looks, especially when you’re the one who launched it. What you’ll hear in this episode: Why “not technically a penalty” doesn’t hold up when some employees can’t reach the discount at allHow most wellness programs end up rewarding the people who were already healthy, and what “meeting people where they are” looks like insteadHow to tell leadership you missed something without calling it a failure, by framing the fix as phase two rather than a do-overWhy an annual physical will likely do more for your healthcare costs than 10,000 steps ever willHow to design one program for a workforce split across an HQ, production floors, and sales reps who spend half the day in the carWhy the most mediocre HR teams protect the process instead of the result, and how to keep pride of authorship from getting in your wayAbout Adam Goldman: Adam is CHRO at Cacique Foods, where he leads HR across a headquarters office, two manufacturing facilities, and a remote sales team spread over more than a dozen states. After spending most of his career in California, he now works from Texas and brings a strong bias for results over process. He’s also the HR leader who will tell you to get out of your office and walk the grocery aisles with a sales rep. HR Voices is brought to you by AllVoices, the employee relations platform for HR teams who’d rather catch issues before they become backfires.

(with guest Jaime Akers, VP of Team Member Relations at Hilton Grand Vacations) For two years, an employee's performance reviews were drafted by AI and lightly edited by her manager, and she only found out because the tool credited her with a project she never touched. The AI isn't really what stings. It's the question underneath it: has anyone actually been paying attention to her work? Now HR has to decide whether this is a performance management failure, a documentation integrity problem, or both, and what it means for every review that manager has ever delivered. What you'll hear in this episode: Why the first move is to pause and notice your own thinking before bias quietly becomes your conclusionWhy your AI acceptable-use policy, not your personal judgment, has to anchor the investigation, because consistency breeds credibilityHow a "hallucinated" project might actually be a botched redaction, and why that still doesn't let the manager off the hookWhere a policy violation ends and a coaching moment begins, and why the cover-up is usually what turns one into the otherWhy a performance review is a moment of connection, not a writing exercise, and what repair looks like when that connection breaksThe case for one-page policies, since legal and compliance are usually the only ones reading page twoAbout Jaime Akers: Jaime Akers is vice president of Team Member Relations at Hilton Grand Vacations, where she leads the Team Member Relations Center of Excellence in the Human Resources department and initiatives focused on employee relations and leadership partnership. With over two decades of experience spanning hospitality, gaming, technology, financial services and human resources, Jaime is passionate about building people-centered workplaces that balance human connection with business performance and the evolving future of work. She is a global HR executive, doctoral researcher and advocate for modern leadership practices that foster trust, accountability, and engagement. Outside of work, Jaime is a member of a running club in Las Vegas and recently completed the Ragnar Trail Soldier Hollow relay in Utah with her team. She adores her husband and two children and brings energy, curiosity and a commitment to growth into everything she does. Those same qualities shape her leadership approach and reflect her belief in continuous learning, both professionally and personally. HR Voices is a podcast by AllVoices, the employee relations case management and whistleblower hotline platform built for situations exactly like this one. Learn more at allvoices.co.

(with guest Jeremy Edmonds, EVP of People & Culture at Snooze) An employee under a performance investigation has been secretly recording every one-on-one with his manager for eight months, in a two-party consent state where that's illegal without disclosure. Now, he wants HR to treat the recordings as proof that his manager set him up to fail. The evidence may be both illegally obtained and true, and choosing to use it or ignore it each carries risk. Jeremy, who has spent 25 years in HR, explains why the urge to act fast is the real trap. What you'll hear in this episode: Why Jeremy splits this into two "swim lanes," the employee's complaint and the recording itself, and why you can't sweep either one under the rugHow to get what's in the recordings without listening to them, by asking the employee to walk you through the moments they think prove their caseWhy the risk of using the recordings depends on the likely outcome: coaching a manager is a very different decision from terminating oneThe two intake questions that reframe the whole case: "What changed eight months ago?" and "Have you raised this with anyone before now?"Why, in 25 years, Jeremy has never seen a manager deliberately set someone up to fail, and what's usually going on insteadHow consistent investigation practices have won him court cases, and why "if it's not documented, it didn't happen"About Jeremy Edmonds: Jeremy Edmonds is EVP of People & Culture at Snooze, an A.M. Eatery. In 25 years in HR, he's built his approach to employee relations around separating the issues, bringing in legal early, and documenting everything as if it will end up in court. HR Voices is a podcast by AllVoices. If you're juggling investigations like this one, see how AllVoices helps HR teams keep case documentation consistent and defensible at allvoices.co.

(with guest Chris Corneen, CHRO at MSI) An employee reports financial irregularities in her department. The investigation confirms she was right, and also finds that she went along with some of the irregularities before she decided to speak up. Now HR has to protect her from retaliation and hold her accountable for her own part, at the same time. And everyone who's thinking about reporting something someday is watching to see how it plays out. What you'll hear in this episode: Why Chris assumes the information has already spread before the complainant even walks in, and why a well-meaning manager running their own side investigation can do more damage than the person being accusedWhy a judge or the EEOC isn't asking whether you reached the right conclusion, only whether your conclusion was reasonable given a sound process (sixth-grade math rules apply: show your work)How letting scope, not the clock, drive the investigation keeps it moving, and why what looks like time pressure is often a different problem you can solve directlyThe "funnel" interview approach: start broad, play a little dumb, and hold off on confronting anyone until you've seen where their story starts to fall apartHow to flip retaliation protection into something more useful, by putting in writing that the whistleblower did the right thing before you ever ask about their own roleWhy a delay in reporting is only one data point, why the reason behind it matters more, and why you'd better run the best investigation of your career if it ends with disciplining a whistleblowerAbout Chris Corneen: Chris is the CHRO at MSI, where investigations are part of the job, whether that means coaching business partners through their own cases or reviewing work before it goes out the door. Chris has defended investigations in front of the EEOC and other federal agencies and has seen firsthand how they get picked apart. Chris's advice for anyone handling a case like this for the first time: go get help, and know whether your organization expects you to ask a peer or escalate to your manager. HR Voices is brought to you by AllVoices. Chris's rule for every investigation is simple: the process will get more scrutiny than the outcome. AllVoices gives ER teams one place to document every intake, interview, and decision, so when someone asks how you got there, the answer is already written down. Learn more at allvoices.co.

(with guest Alissa Horn, Senior Director of Global Investigations and Employee Relations at Mattel) An employee files an ethics complaint about their manager's expense reports. One week later, that same manager puts them on a PIP. The performance concerns are real, but nobody ever documented them or raised them with the employee. Now HR has to figure out whether this is a legitimate performance conversation with terrible timing or retaliation dressed up as process, knowing that from the outside the two can look exactly the same. What you'll hear in this episode: Why the timing isn't actually the biggest red flag here, and why a PIP with no prior coaching or documentation is the real problemWhy filing a complaint doesn't put a "bubble of protection" around an employee who isn't meeting expectationsWhat changes when investigations are handled by an independent ER function instead of the HR business partner who sits next to that leader in succession planning an hour laterWhat to tell the subject's manager when an investigation opens, what to hold back on purpose, and why uncorroborated details can permanently change how a manager sees their employeeThe questions that reveal whether a PIP is weaponized: Is it an outlier? Is the manager following the documented process? Is HR?How to handle a leader who wants to proceed anyway, starting with whether the person you're talking to is senior enough to own that risk for the companyAbout Alissa Horn: Alissa leads global investigations and employee relations at Mattel. She started her career as an HR business partner before moving into ER, and she's spent roughly 15 years running investigations, which gives her a rare view of both sides of the HRBP–investigator relationship that this scenario puts under pressure. Her parting advice for anyone facing this for the first time: you don't have to have the answer right away. HR Voices is brought to you by AllVoices. If this episode made you wonder whether your complaints, investigations, and performance documentation live in separate places that never talk to each other, that's exactly the gap AllVoices helps ER and HR teams close. Learn more at allvoices.co.

(with guest Michelle Spencer Fourney, Global Director of Employee Relations at Zscaler) A manager tells HR she's "pretty sure" an employee has undiagnosed ADHD — based on nothing but his disorganization — and asks whether she can require a psych evaluation before granting more deadline extensions. He's never disclosed a condition or asked for an accommodation. In this episode, host Rebecca Taylor and Michelle Spencer Fourney dig into what happens when good intentions turn into an amateur diagnosis, and why "pretty sure" is never a basis for anything. It's a scenario built on assumption stacked on assumption — and untangling it means going back to the one thing that's actually documented: performance. What you'll hear in this episode: Why a manager's well-meaning guess about a disability can create more legal exposure than the performance issue it was meant to solveA framework for sequencing a hard HR conversation: start with what's easy (performance), save the harder disability conversation for lastHow to tell the difference between witnessed behavior and a diagnosis — and why HR should never let a manager blur the twoWhat to actually ask a manager who suspects an employee is using an accommodation as an "excuse" for poor performanceWhy HR almost never talks to the employee directly in these situations — and what that says about the invisible work HR doesHow to turn a manager's success in a moment like this into a training story that builds a peer network of better managers About Michelle Spencer Fourney: Michelle is Global Director of Employee Relations at Zscaler, where she navigates the highest-stakes, most ambiguous conversations HR has with managers — the ones involving disability, performance, and everything tangled up in between. Her approach: start where it's easy, protect the employee's privacy, and never lose the manager in the process of coaching them through it.

(with guest Maggie Lansdale, Global VP of People at Cannondale) An employee walks out the door and finally tells the truth: a director has been verbally abusive to junior staff for years. She never reported it while employed because she didn't trust the process, and now she won't put her name on it. HR has credible detail, a witness who won't go on record, and a director who's otherwise a top performer that leadership doesn't want to lose. Rebecca and Maggie dig into what happens next — and why the version of the story you're told first is rarely the whole story. What you'll hear in this episode: Why people save their honest feedback for the exit interview — and what that says about whether your process is actually trustedHow to weigh a "brilliant jerk's" revenue against the quiet cost of the talent walking out the door underneath themWhy the order you talk to people in (junior staff, peers, leadership, then the director) changes what you're able to find outHow to hear "verbal abuse" or "toxic workplace" without assuming you already know what happened — and why the words people reach for aren't always the legal definitionWhat to actually document when nothing rises to a formal complaint yet, so a pattern doesn't take two or three years to become undeniableHow cultural and communication differences change what abuse, feedback, or a manager's bluntness even looks like across a team About Maggie Lansdale: Maggie is Global VP of People at Cannondale, where she leads the people function across a global, multi-location team. With a career built inside HR teams of various sizes — from scrappy startups tracking everything in a Google Doc to global operations — she's spent years untangling exactly this kind of case: credible allegations, no formal complaint, and a leadership team reluctant to act. She's a go-to "HR buddy" for practitioners working through hard calls alone.

(with guest Earlieen Bethel, VP of Human Resources at Comcast) An employee resigns with two weeks' notice. Her manager, annoyed, tells her to leave that day — but never processes it as a termination, so she's paid through her notice period as agreed. Weeks later, she files for unemployment, and the same manager disputes it, claiming she quit. Now HR has to reconstruct what actually happened, defend a decision with almost no documentation, and manage a manager who doesn't seem to realize he can't have it both ways. Rebecca Taylor and Earlieen Bethel dig into where this really goes wrong — and how far the risk actually extends once a manager acts outside the process. What you'll hear in this episode: Why "it's just unemployment insurance" is one of the more dangerous assumptions in HR, and what's actually at stake once a state gets involvedHow to tell the difference between a manager who willfully ignored process and one who was never equipped to follow it — and why that distinction changes what HR does nextThe specific documentation gaps (verbal notice, no timesheet, no resignation letter) that turn a routine offboarding into something HR can't defendWhy an inconsistent offboarding process becomes a much bigger liability the moment a protected-class employee is involvedHow to build a defensible path forward when the facts genuinely don't favor the employerWhy AI can help HR find answers faster, but can't make the judgment call on cases like this one About Earlieen Bethel: Earlieen Bethel is Vice President of Human Resources at Comcast, where she leads HR business partners supporting frontline leaders across the organization. She approaches employee relations from a culture-first lens — treating every policy decision as a reflection of what an organization tolerates and reinforces, not just what it writes down. Her focus spans compliance, offboarding process, and coaching frontline managers to close the gap between what they intend to do and what they're actually equipped to do.

with Ben Martin, VP of HR Strategy and Workforce Planning at Cengage An ops lead spends a year building the case management infrastructure a VP now uses to justify cutting a manager training budget — except the dashboard doesn't capture the side-channel complaints that would tell a different story. The data isn't wrong. It's just incomplete, and nobody in the room knows that but him. Ben Martin gets into what you actually do in that moment, and how HR ends up here in the first place. What you'll hear in this episode: Why a VP quoting your dashboard in a QBR is a win worth protecting, even when what they're saying is wrongThe difference between handing someone a dashboard and actually managing the change around itWhy data needs a "so what" attached before it ever reaches a leadership meeting — and whose job that isWhere AI genuinely helps pull signal out of Slack messages and hallway conversations, and where it shouldn't touch that data at allWhy there's no such thing as a system that captures everything, and what that means for how you talk about your own blind spotsThe case for not correcting a VP in the room — and what to do with that information instead About Ben Martin: Ben is VP of HR Strategy and Workforce Planning at Cengage, where he leads a team focused on turning workforce data into decisions leaders can actually act on. He's spent his career at the intersection of HR analytics and business strategy, with a clear-eyed view of what dashboards are good for and where human judgment still has to do the real work.

with Sophia Sanchez, Employee Relations Leader at Infosys An employee says HR botched her harassment complaint — too slow, no updates, sided with her manager with no real explanation. She's not wrong about the process. But now the same team accused of dropping the ball has to investigate itself, credibly, without torching the trust that's already cracked. Sophia Sanchez walks through what happens when the complaint isn't about the incident anymore — it's about HR. What you'll hear in this episode: Why "we can't talk about it, it's confidential" is the excuse that does the most damage — and what to say insteadThe turnaround-time math: how fast HR should actually respond to a complaint, and why silence is what pushes people to go outside the companyWhy the team that made the original call should never be the one reviewing it — and who should step in insteadHow to close the loop with an employee when the outcome doesn't change, without sounding like you're covering for yourselfWhat actually gets lost when investigators email employees questions instead of sitting down with themThe one bias check every re-investigation needs: don't assume the manager's right, and don't assume they're not About Sophia Sanchez: Sophia is an Employee Relations Leader at Infosys, where she manages complex workplace investigations and builds the processes that hold up when things get scrutinized from the inside. She's spent her career in the room where "we followed the process" has to actually be true — not just claimed — and she brings that same rigor to how HR teams should investigate themselves.

An employee submits a voicemail as proof her manager threatened her job over a weekend shift. It sounds exactly like him. He swears he never left it. Forensic voice analysis can't settle it either way — and both sides have already lawyered up. Fabienne Lopez joins HR Voices to walk through what happens when HR has no playbook for evidence that might not even be real, and has to build the investigation in real time. What you'll hear in this episode: Why jumping straight to "did the manager do it or not" is the riskiest move you can make in a case like thisHow to bring IT in as a real investigative partner — not just for AI detection, but for carrier records, IP data, and file historyA framework for treating AI-generated evidence as just one more data point, not a special category that changes your processWhy the relationship between the two parties usually matters more than who's "right" — and what it means when someone skips a direct conversation and goes straight to a complaintThe ethics of asking to see someone's phone as evidence, and where that request gets complicated fastHow to keep a witness list contained without it turning into a witch huntWhy "we'll never know for sure what happened" is sometimes the actual outcome — and what HR does next when the evidence never resolves cleanly About Fabienne Lopez: Fabienne is Chief People Officer at Xponential Fitness, where she leads people strategy across the company's portfolio of fitness brands. With a background spanning HR leadership roles across multiple industries, she specializes in employee relations, investigations, and building HR functions that operate as true business partners rather than compliance gatekeepers.

An anonymous ethics hotline report lands on your desk. Widespread favoritism on the sales team. No names. No dates. No incidents. Nothing you can act on. The VP of sales wants it closed as unactionable. So you pull comp and promotion data just to be thorough, and the pattern lines up with the complaint almost perfectly. Now what? Rebecca Taylor hands this scenario to John Mezzo, a C-suite HR executive, with no prep and no warning. What follows is a working session on how to move on a claim with no complainant and no accused, without turning it into a witch hunt. Inside this episode: Why you go to the VP first and open with "are you aware that" instead of "look what I found"The karaoke test: how favoritism shows up without anyone intending itWhy "HR said" is the most damaging phrase in the business, and how John kills itReading a favoritism complaint as feedback in imperfect language, not a diagnosisWhat a real fix looks like when there's nothing formal to substantiateThe HR myth John wants deadNew episodes of HR Voices every week. Follow so you don't miss the next scenario.

A high performer goes quiet, and her manager decides she's quiet quitting and starts pushing her toward the door. What he doesn't know: she's caring for a parent with a terminal diagnosis. Host Rebecca Taylor and Cindy Williams, VP of HR at CAL's Convenience, break down why the real risk isn't the employee's silence, it's a manager who tried to engineer an exit instead of asking one honest question. Cindy runs HR for 2,500 employees across 210 frontline locations, and her take flips the script on manager accountability, confidentiality, documentation, and the legal exposure a mishandled exit creates. Plus her pushback on HR's "nobody appreciates us" narrative. HR Voices is brought to you by AllVoices. Learn more at https://www.allvoices.co

An HR analyst builds a $400/hour AI consulting practice on evenings and weekends. She never tells her employer. There's no moonlighting policy. Then her manager finds it on LinkedIn and raises concerns about loyalty, distraction, and whether she's using the company's AI tools for personal gain. So what can HR actually restrict? Rebecca Taylor sits down with Miriam Chan, Head of Global People Operations at Marrow, to unpack one of the most current employee relations scenarios in HR: moonlighting in the AI era, when the side hustle is legal, the policy doesn't exist, and "loyalty" isn't a policy violation. In this episode: Why the first question isn't about the employee, it's about the manager's motivationThe acceptable use policy problem: most were written before AI tools existedWhat "loyalty" and "distraction" actually mean when there's no performance issueHow to build a moonlighting policy with a product manager's mindset: discovery first, then define the problemWhy moonlighting almost always signals an unmet need: skills, compensation, or a career pivotThe double-dipping line: when side work touches your company's customersSometimes the employee broke no rule and the company still has a real problem. This episode is about closing the gap before it becomes a conflict. HR Voices is a scenario-based podcast from AllVoices. Real workplace dilemmas, experienced HR and People leaders, no script. 🔗 Learn how AllVoices helps HR teams manage employee relations: https://www.allvoices.co 💬 Have a scenario you want us to tackle? Drop it in the comments.