5 ms·

I'm certainly sorry someone was made to feel that way, and I don't agree with the reasons she was sidelined, but in the absence of the specifics, the fact an em

I'm certainly sorry someone was made to feel that way, and I don't agree with the reasons she was sidelined, but in the absence of the specifics, the fact an employer who found someone to be performing differently than needed for a position, paid said employee to find a better fitting one is pretty good. The only improvement I can think of is to look for another position internally to try them in or retrain them? But if your entire business is narrow in acope, this may be impossible by inspection. Firing someone is denying them unemployment benefits in the US, and a bad culture fit is not sufficient for that. And being on unemployment isn't always the best look on a resume. They put this person on unemployment at full salary without it ever appearing on her resume, that seems like a really good deal.

xivzgrev 4y ago
The key difference is that she was never told she was being fired. If the manager had simply said “hey this isn’t working for xyz, we are going to put you in a minimal role for 3 months to give you time to look for something else”, that would be generous. By not telling her, it’s a waste of everyone’s time and money. She figures it out at some point on her own, and feels disrespected (rightfully), that the manager didn’t have the balls to tell her. Additionally the manager hurts the company by having this employee just there for who knows how long.
- galangalalgol 4y ago
  That is a very good point. If it had been communicated even informally that would have been so much better.
- giaour 4y ago
  I imagine bosses engage in "quiet firing" specifically in order to avoid difficult conversations. Keeping someone on the payroll AND explaining that the role isn't working out seems like the worst of both worlds for a confrontation-averse manager! I think what you propose is pretty similar to the system in place at Amazon (at least ~2019, when I left AWS). It was common knowledge (or at least was widely assumed) that the most likely outcome of a PIP was dismissal, so being put on a PIP was treated as notice that you should look for a new job.
  - Shindi 4y ago
    I think in the context of communicating bad news, the PIP system Amazon had sounds like it sucks, but at least it was a way to communicate that you should find another job. The problem with the person in this article is that there was no communication at all. It was extremely wishy washy. Btw if you are confrontation averse, you should not be managing anyone ever.
    - giaour 4y ago
      > Btw if you are confrontation averse, you should not be managing anyone ever. 100%, but that requires that their manager be willing to have a difficult conversation with them. It’s not impossible that your whole reporting chain can be staffed with spineless, chickenshit managers.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
drewcoo 4y ago
> in the absence of the specifics . . . side with the employer? Employers are not amorphous blobs of cold logic. They are big lumpy sacks full of humans with all that entails.

xivzgrev 4y ago

The key difference is that she was never told she was being fired. If the manager had simply said “hey this isn’t working for xyz, we are going to put you in a minimal role for 3 months to give you time to look for something else”, that would be generous. By not telling her, it’s a waste of everyone’s time and money. She figures it out at some point on her own, and feels disrespected (rightfully), that the manager didn’t have the balls to tell her. Additionally the manager hurts the company by having this employee just there for who knows how long.

galangalalgol 4y ago
That is a very good point. If it had been communicated even informally that would have been so much better.
giaour 4y ago
I imagine bosses engage in "quiet firing" specifically in order to avoid difficult conversations. Keeping someone on the payroll AND explaining that the role isn't working out seems like the worst of both worlds for a confrontation-averse manager! I think what you propose is pretty similar to the system in place at Amazon (at least ~2019, when I left AWS). It was common knowledge (or at least was widely assumed) that the most likely outcome of a PIP was dismissal, so being put on a PIP was treated as notice that you should look for a new job.
- Shindi 4y ago
  I think in the context of communicating bad news, the PIP system Amazon had sounds like it sucks, but at least it was a way to communicate that you should find another job. The problem with the person in this article is that there was no communication at all. It was extremely wishy washy. Btw if you are confrontation averse, you should not be managing anyone ever.
  - giaour 4y ago
    > Btw if you are confrontation averse, you should not be managing anyone ever. 100%, but that requires that their manager be willing to have a difficult conversation with them. It’s not impossible that your whole reporting chain can be staffed with spineless, chickenshit managers.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

drewcoo 4y ago

> in the absence of the specifics . . . side with the employer? Employers are not amorphous blobs of cold logic. They are big lumpy sacks full of humans with all that entails.