4 ms·
Can you proceed with the firing before the second "6 month" warning has finished? If this is just warnings for under-performance in an office, this seems fine
by jlgreco 13y ago
Can you proceed with the firing before the second "6 month" warning has finished?
If this is just warnings for under-performance in an office, this seems fine (so long as I don't have to wait the 6 months).
In less white collar jobs I don't think your warning system is necessarily appropriate. A restaurant manager should not have to issue warnings for an employee showing up to work without pants, they should be able to fire on the spot.
- smtddr 13y agoThe 6 months is only for performance issues. I'll say that showing up to work without pants generally falls in the "extremely wrong" things to do, like punching a coworker, setting your cubicle on fire, sending a nude image to an email-distribution. All fair-game for instant termination. It doesn't have to be 6 months if something "extremely wrong" happens during those 6 months. Maybe 6 months is only appropriate for at&t. I'm just saying they need a "reasonable chance" to give you enough data to measure performance change. That's different for different industries/companies. For a start-up with lots of coding, maybe only 1 month is needed to measure any change in performance. But some of the blame goes to the employer as well. In theory an employer should almost never have to deal with an unfixable bad employee. If a company really keeps having repeated problems with bad employees, the interview-process probably needs some fixing.