4 ms·

Why would you expect to be able to come back into having people report to you after a five month leave from a high-paced environment? Getting brought back up to

Why would you expect to be able to come back into having people report to you after a five month leave from a high-paced environment? Getting brought back up to speed will be obviously necessary, and the PIP thing sounds like an explicit effort towards exactly that. So, in the end, she collected half a year's pay for no work, and then quit. The insurance "glitch" is highly suspicious, but, aside from that, I can't help but coming away from this article with an impression of an air of self-entitlement. The obvious agenda (and probably the only reason this weakly composed and unconvincing narrative even got published) regarding gender in tech seems absolutely shoehorned in. At companies like these, women in fact have a clear advantage in getting hired - though that is damaged by stories of women collecting pay for no work and then quitting right afterwards. I am glad that the author has recovered and is healthy, but this article is very unconvincing.

fweespeech 11y ago
> Why would you expect to be able to come back into having people report to you after a five month leave from a high-paced environment? Getting brought back up to speed will be obviously necessary, and the PIP thing sounds like an explicit effort towards exactly that. So, in the end, she collected half a year's pay for no work, and then quit. PIP is a prelude to firing the majority of the time and is basically putting you on notice that you'll be laid off/fired if there is a need to reduce head count.
- 78666cdc 11y ago
  She should explain that then. Another commented on this post said (s)he knows multiple people that have gone on PIP, gotten out of it, and are working normally now.
  - fweespeech 11y ago
    https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/never-sign-a-pip-heres-why/ https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/never-sign-a... > There isn’t any upside to signing the PIP because, once one is presented, the decision to fire has already been made. A manager who genuinely wants to improve a person’s performance will communicate off the record. Once the manager is “documenting”, the relationship’s over. Also, people very rarely pass PIPs. Some people get the hint and leave, others fail and are fired, and in the remainder of cases, the PIP is ruled “inconclusive”, which means “not enough evidence to terminate at this time”. That’s not exactly an endorsement. For a PIP to be passed would require HR to side with the employee over management, and that will never happen. If the employee is under the same manager in 6 months, there will be another PIP. If the employee tries to move to another team, that will be almost impossible, because a “passed” PIP doesn’t mean exoneration. The reputation for instability created by a PIP lingers on for years. What I am essentially saying here is that, once a PIP appears, you should not sign it for the sake of maintaining a professional relationship. There is no relationship at that point. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=473232 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=473232 http://www.askamanager.org/2013/05/what-to-do-when-youre-put-on-a-performance-improvement-plan.html http://www.askamanager.org/2013/05/what-to-do-when-youre-put... > Okay, here’s the deal with performance improvement plans: They are indeed very often the last thing that happens before you’re let go. In theory, if you meet the terms of the plan, you’ll preserve your job and be able to move forward, but in practice, by the time you’re on one, it’s often because things aren’t working out and aren’t likely to. > To be clear, that doesn’t mean that PIPs never end in success. Sometimes they do. But because they so often don’t, it’s smart to be job-searching meanwhile, because they’re so very much the writing on the wall giving you a warning that you might lose your job at the end of the process. (However, don’t let your job search interfere with your focus on work. If you have to pick between the two, choose work if that’s likely to make the difference between meeting the terms of the PIP and not meeting them.)
objclxt 11y ago
> Why would you expect to be able to come back into having people report to you after a five month leave from a high-paced environment? You seem to be suggesting that if I'm a manager and I take maternity leave it's totally OK for me to come back to a completely different position with no reports or responsibility. That seems...wrong. > So, in the end, she collected half a year's pay for no work, and then quit [...] At companies like these, women in fact have a clear advantage in getting hired - though that is damaged by stories of women collecting pay for no work and then quitting right afterwards. That sounds like the ramblings of a misogynist. Firstly, you say women have a "clear advantage" at tech companies, when there's absolutely no evidence that's the case (indeed, all of the evidence is the opposite: most tech firms are majority male, with very few women in leadership roles). Secondly, you seem to be suggesting we shouldn't provide paid maternity (or paternity) leave and to do so damages a company, when again all the evidence on productivity suggests that companies that provide such benefits perform better and have more satisfied employees that are retained for longer. > I can't help but coming away from this article with an impression of an air of self-entitlement. Yes, how dare a women who goes off to have children expect to be able to come back into the workplace in the same position she had when she left? Comments like yours illustrate exactly what's wrong with the industry. In a way it's a shame you're going to be downvoted because people really need to see the kind of crap that gets thrown around.
- johnbellone 11y ago
  > Yes, how dare a women who goes off to have children expect to be able to come back into the workplace in the same position she had when she left? Cancer. We're talking about fucking cancer. But otherwise you're spot on - I wish this asshole wouldn't be downvoted and would have used a real account.
- 78666cdc 11y ago
  You're strongly misinterpreting what I said. Of course she should be back in the same position after maternity leave. But when there's a team of people that report to you, they need to report to someone else while you're away for five months. Of course when you go back they'll be reporting to someone else until you're back up to speed on what's gone on for nearly half a year. Whether getting back up to speed takes 15 minutes or two weeks will of course very with respect to the position and the project. See also the edit I added to my original comment. Edit: and yes, in my experience and from what I've seen, women have a clear advantage in hiring. Note that I specifically said "hiring" advantage.
rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
If, as you imply, women game the system, then perhaps it is because they know the company will wring them out until dry and then kick them out the second they're a minor liability. I work in higher education, where staff and faculty are expected to have lives outside of work. People have kids, go on leave, then come back. We accommodate them, and they repay in loyalty.
- 78666cdc 11y ago
  I don't imply that women game the system, that would be a ridiculous thing to say. Of course parental leave should be standard in society, and I wish the USA in particular were better about it as a whole. What I'm saying is that it isn't clear from the article whether there were explicit efforts to catch her up on the surely significant changes that had happened over six months and whether that was the purpose of the PIP program, which it also doesn't explain. If they had taken away her responsibilities and diminished her role as a result of this leave, then that would be incredibly shitty and she would very justifiable have reason to sue. But it's not clear that that's what happened. The company could very well have been trying to re-onboard her. We have half the story.
  - rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
    Your clarification and points are solid but the flow of events does seem to point the vindication towards the author. Given the many stories in this thread and elsewhere claiming similar cases, it would be reasonable to assume that her claims were justified. If it weren't the case, Amazon should stand front and center to disarm it. I'm rather surprised that a company that has treated me exceptionally as a customer is not as concerned with repairing its rep as an employer as it seems to be.
thetrb 11y ago
The fact that you see it as self-entitlement when someone wants to come back to their job after a pregnancy and cancer treatment shows how wrong the current attitude in the US towards a healthy work / life balance is.
- 78666cdc 11y ago
  As I replied elsewhere, that is not at all what I meant. See my edit.

fweespeech 11y ago

> Why would you expect to be able to come back into having people report to you after a five month leave from a high-paced environment? Getting brought back up to speed will be obviously necessary, and the PIP thing sounds like an explicit effort towards exactly that. So, in the end, she collected half a year's pay for no work, and then quit. PIP is a prelude to firing the majority of the time and is basically putting you on notice that you'll be laid off/fired if there is a need to reduce head count.

78666cdc 11y ago
She should explain that then. Another commented on this post said (s)he knows multiple people that have gone on PIP, gotten out of it, and are working normally now.
- fweespeech 11y ago
  https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/never-sign-a-pip-heres-why/ https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/never-sign-a... > There isn’t any upside to signing the PIP because, once one is presented, the decision to fire has already been made. A manager who genuinely wants to improve a person’s performance will communicate off the record. Once the manager is “documenting”, the relationship’s over. Also, people very rarely pass PIPs. Some people get the hint and leave, others fail and are fired, and in the remainder of cases, the PIP is ruled “inconclusive”, which means “not enough evidence to terminate at this time”. That’s not exactly an endorsement. For a PIP to be passed would require HR to side with the employee over management, and that will never happen. If the employee is under the same manager in 6 months, there will be another PIP. If the employee tries to move to another team, that will be almost impossible, because a “passed” PIP doesn’t mean exoneration. The reputation for instability created by a PIP lingers on for years. What I am essentially saying here is that, once a PIP appears, you should not sign it for the sake of maintaining a professional relationship. There is no relationship at that point. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=473232 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=473232 http://www.askamanager.org/2013/05/what-to-do-when-youre-put-on-a-performance-improvement-plan.html http://www.askamanager.org/2013/05/what-to-do-when-youre-put... > Okay, here’s the deal with performance improvement plans: They are indeed very often the last thing that happens before you’re let go. In theory, if you meet the terms of the plan, you’ll preserve your job and be able to move forward, but in practice, by the time you’re on one, it’s often because things aren’t working out and aren’t likely to. > To be clear, that doesn’t mean that PIPs never end in success. Sometimes they do. But because they so often don’t, it’s smart to be job-searching meanwhile, because they’re so very much the writing on the wall giving you a warning that you might lose your job at the end of the process. (However, don’t let your job search interfere with your focus on work. If you have to pick between the two, choose work if that’s likely to make the difference between meeting the terms of the PIP and not meeting them.)

objclxt 11y ago

> Why would you expect to be able to come back into having people report to you after a five month leave from a high-paced environment? You seem to be suggesting that if I'm a manager and I take maternity leave it's totally OK for me to come back to a completely different position with no reports or responsibility. That seems...wrong. > So, in the end, she collected half a year's pay for no work, and then quit [...] At companies like these, women in fact have a clear advantage in getting hired - though that is damaged by stories of women collecting pay for no work and then quitting right afterwards. That sounds like the ramblings of a misogynist. Firstly, you say women have a "clear advantage" at tech companies, when there's absolutely no evidence that's the case (indeed, all of the evidence is the opposite: most tech firms are majority male, with very few women in leadership roles). Secondly, you seem to be suggesting we shouldn't provide paid maternity (or paternity) leave and to do so damages a company, when again all the evidence on productivity suggests that companies that provide such benefits perform better and have more satisfied employees that are retained for longer. > I can't help but coming away from this article with an impression of an air of self-entitlement. Yes, how dare a women who goes off to have children expect to be able to come back into the workplace in the same position she had when she left? Comments like yours illustrate exactly what's wrong with the industry. In a way it's a shame you're going to be downvoted because people really need to see the kind of crap that gets thrown around.

johnbellone 11y ago
> Yes, how dare a women who goes off to have children expect to be able to come back into the workplace in the same position she had when she left? Cancer. We're talking about fucking cancer. But otherwise you're spot on - I wish this asshole wouldn't be downvoted and would have used a real account.
78666cdc 11y ago
You're strongly misinterpreting what I said. Of course she should be back in the same position after maternity leave. But when there's a team of people that report to you, they need to report to someone else while you're away for five months. Of course when you go back they'll be reporting to someone else until you're back up to speed on what's gone on for nearly half a year. Whether getting back up to speed takes 15 minutes or two weeks will of course very with respect to the position and the project. See also the edit I added to my original comment. Edit: and yes, in my experience and from what I've seen, women have a clear advantage in hiring. Note that I specifically said "hiring" advantage.

rm_-rf_slash 11y ago

If, as you imply, women game the system, then perhaps it is because they know the company will wring them out until dry and then kick them out the second they're a minor liability. I work in higher education, where staff and faculty are expected to have lives outside of work. People have kids, go on leave, then come back. We accommodate them, and they repay in loyalty.

78666cdc 11y ago
I don't imply that women game the system, that would be a ridiculous thing to say. Of course parental leave should be standard in society, and I wish the USA in particular were better about it as a whole. What I'm saying is that it isn't clear from the article whether there were explicit efforts to catch her up on the surely significant changes that had happened over six months and whether that was the purpose of the PIP program, which it also doesn't explain. If they had taken away her responsibilities and diminished her role as a result of this leave, then that would be incredibly shitty and she would very justifiable have reason to sue. But it's not clear that that's what happened. The company could very well have been trying to re-onboard her. We have half the story.
- rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
  Your clarification and points are solid but the flow of events does seem to point the vindication towards the author. Given the many stories in this thread and elsewhere claiming similar cases, it would be reasonable to assume that her claims were justified. If it weren't the case, Amazon should stand front and center to disarm it. I'm rather surprised that a company that has treated me exceptionally as a customer is not as concerned with repairing its rep as an employer as it seems to be.

thetrb 11y ago

The fact that you see it as self-entitlement when someone wants to come back to their job after a pregnancy and cancer treatment shows how wrong the current attitude in the US towards a healthy work / life balance is.

78666cdc 11y ago
As I replied elsewhere, that is not at all what I meant. See my edit.