151–160 of 201 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why just fire them? Legal ass covering--especially if the employee is a minority.
Isn’t that why you shouldn’t just fire them?
I'd like to be snide about this, but the problem is that there really are an amazing amount of shitty companies out there and forcing at least some documentation is likely a good thing, in general.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So while PIPs might be started with the expectation that most employees won't improve, I think they're also started with the hope that they will. I've seen it both ways and I think it comes down to the quality of the company and the manager - which, of course, varies widely. A good manager doesn't need PIPs because they're always communicating clearly and consistently to their reports about how they're doing. Ultim…
>A good manager doesn't need PIPs because they're always communicating clearly and consistently to their reports about how they're doing. More generally, a good manager is someone who shields their people from surprises. A PIP should never come as a surprise to someone. Unfortunately, there are bad managers out there who fail at that. It's not the manager's fault if someone gets put on a PIP, but it's absolutely 100%…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What’s the alternative? Give them a rainbow sticker? It’s business among adults, performance matters. If you can’t meet expectations then it’s not a good fit. That’s part of life.
An informal pip. You can tell someone they need to improve their performance. You can help them make a plan. And you can help evaluate the result. Making a plan can certainly help. You don't need to involve HR inorder to make a plan. (Not saying that pip isn't a good concept, just that a formal pip is a last resort kind of tool)
I agree the ideal manager who is a good communicator with a genuinely incompetent employee ought to make a soft touch. If they're really bad, ideally let them know they can look for a job if they wish, offer a neutral recommendation, etc. Let them know a PIP might be coming etc since legal basis must be covered.
Problem with a poor manager, even with a soft touch, is maybe their expectations actually are bad (especially a pointy haired boss who doesn't have a conception of the labor needed). Maybe they have OCD and see all work as bad, in the same way someone might consider Scarlett Johansen extremely ugly because of that one single freckle ruining the whole thing. I've seen this too. That's all to say if a manager comes in with the sweetest gentlest informal approach and complains to Scarlett Johansen about how awful the freckle is, well, even the soft touch won't help much there.
I would imagine in most real world cases we can see both, and we can see mixes, where it's a so-so employee who might be great under a strong manager, but is weaker under a OCD manager who puts the magnifying glass on the weaknesses. And of course sometimes managers will put the magnifying glass on the weaknesses because they want to eliminate this employee for various external reasons.
There is nothing to hate here. I have given numerous PIP's as a manager and only actually fired once. The purpose of a PIP is to improve, not to fire a person.
I've never been put under a PIP, but if I were, I'd be looking for a way out. The company has told me I suck and, even if I recovered, I'd be concerned that just having had it there would hurt any future progression I had in the company.
I will also mention talk of managers getting PIPped, she reports that indeed her manager got PIPed by the director above.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've never seen anyone put on a PIP where the intention was anything other than eventual firing. In all these cases, the person was doing an awful job for over a year, or in some cases, since they were hired.
Why would the company hire them then? That just sounds like emotional abuse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I too was put on a PIP early in my career, and worked my way out of it. It was fine. That said, I agree with the general sentiment that much more often than not the employer is not acting in good faith. Over the decades I've seen way too many colleagues get put on a PIP, I tell them to work hard because it can get better, and then they get let go anyways. Not sure what I'd do today if it happened to me. Probably a bi…
Worked as a PM at a well known tech company, great relationship with my director. He leaves, new director comes in and within three months I'm on a PIP. I'm given a list of work products to create for a new offering that has been discussed, which on the face of it are entirely reasonable, and the standard 30 days. 100% ghosted by my Director. Weekly 1:1s? He no-shows 2 of them. Near zero input. In "fairness", I knew…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would drastically prefer a lack of warning over a lack of reason, and I cannot help but interpret any other position as disingenuous.
A lack of warning can leave you in the lurch financially and career-wise. Getting the heads+up that it's time to find a new job let's you keep banking paychecks while you make a seamless transition to a new opportunity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An even better token of respect is to just can the person and give them a respectable severance package, so they have months (plural) to find their next thing.
Don't see how that's strictly better since the person loses out on potential feedback from the PIP vs straight firing. PIP also doesn't prevent someone from getting severance, firing is firing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An even better token of respect is to just can the person and give them a respectable severance package, so they have months (plural) to find their next thing.
Honest question, if someone is performing horribly, why do they deserve a severance package? Isn't that was unemployment insurance is for?
The length of employment is the most important part of the equation.