Guildance on managing employee

Southend1

Funky_Bold_Ribena wrote: »

Inadequate instruction and training? What training do you need to:
Not lie?
Not upset your customers?
Not upset your colleagues?

If they really need that much instruction and training then the business probably can't support them anyway...if you have to keep them under observation to work out whether they are telling the truth, and not let them near customers or colleagues then what's the point in them being there in the first place?

Completely ridiculous to pu.ssyfoot around this issue; they are clearly not working out for varying reasons. As you say - the OP made a mistake in hiring them so it's time to step up to the plate and rectify this mistake asap.

So every time an employee is complained about by a customer or colleague they should be sacked?

There is no indication in the OP that the employee has received adequate training or induction. OP admits having no experience of managing people.

Most cases of poor performance I have come across are down to unclear expectations or poor training.

I'm not saying don't sack him if it doesn't work out, BUT.... Only if training, induction and probation action plan have been properly implemented first. Otherwise OP will be wondering why he keeps hiring people who don't "fit in"

Funky_Bold_Ribena

Southend1 wrote: »

So every time an employee is complained about by a customer or colleague they should be sacked?

There is no indication in the OP that the employee has received adequate training or induction. OP admits having no experience of managing people.

Most cases of poor performance I have come across are down to unclear expectations or poor training.

I'm not saying don't sack him if it doesn't work out, BUT.... Only if training, induction and probation action plan have been properly implemented first. Otherwise OP will be wondering why he keeps hiring people who don't "fit in"

If they have had all 3 - in the first 5 weeks then yes they need to go. *

This isn't poor performance [that is not meeting targets set]...these are the basics of working life. If a manager has to set a target of 'don't lie' then honestly - something is terribly wrong with that employee.

*from a Member of the Chartered Management Institute, many quals including L5 management qualification with 25 years experience in managing staff...

Southend1

Funky_Bold_Ribena wrote: »

If they have had all 3 - in the first 5 weeks then yes they need to go. *

This isn't poor performance [that is not meeting targets set]...these are the basics of working life. If a manager has to set a target of 'don't lie' then honestly - something is terribly wrong with that employee.

*from a Member of the Chartered Management Institute, many quals including L5 management qualification with 25 years experience in managing staff...

There isn't enough detail in the OP to get a full understanding of what the "lying" or the "complaints" were about. Clearly if "don't lie" had to be a target there would be something seriously wrong. However...

OP is asking for advice on managing the employee not sacking him, which would suggest that management is the issue here. This is supported by OP's admission of limited management experience and judgement that the employee showed potential. Clearly if the employee had done something very serious then the question would have been asked in a different way.

Regardless of what management qualifications you have (and I have some too so let's not get into a willy waving contest here as it won't help OP), firing every new starter who isn't employee of the year by week 5 is NOT good practice and I'm surprised that someone with your experience is advocating such a course of action without knowing the details. OP needs to do what is best for his business in the long run, not what is easiest in the short term. And don't forget that people's livelihoods are at stake.

Hopefully OP will come back with further detail so more informed comment can be made.

Funky_Bold_Ribena

Southend1 wrote: »

There isn't enough detail in the OP to get a full understanding of what the "lying" or the "complaints" were about. Clearly if "don't lie" had to be a target there would be something seriously wrong. However...

OP is asking for advice on managing the employee not sacking him, which would suggest that management is the issue here. This is supported by OP's admission of limited management experience and judgement that the employee showed potential. Clearly if the employee had done something very serious then the question would have been asked in a different way.

Regardless of what management qualifications you have (and I have some too so let's not get into a willy waving contest here as it won't help OP), firing every new starter who isn't employee of the year by week 5 is NOT good practice and I'm surprised that someone with your experience is advocating such a course of action without knowing the details. OP needs to do what is best for his business in the long run, not what is easiest in the short term. And don't forget that people's livelihoods are at stake.

Hopefully OP will come back with further detail so more informed comment can be made.

Yes, firing every new starter who is not employee of the year by week 5 is not good practice; but the OP was very clear about the effects of the person's behaviour and that there are 3 issues within 5 weeks.

And yes absolutely there are livelihoods at stake; the OP's and their committed hard working staff mainly; which the employee seems to be putting into jeopardy.

And I don't have a willy. So perhaps leave yours outside the office eh? It's completely inappropriate language and shows your lack of professionalism to even mention your willy and what you do with it.

Southend1

Funky_Bold_Ribena wrote: »

Yes, firing every new starter who is not employee of the year by week 5 is not good practice; but the OP was very clear about the effects of the person's behaviour and that there are 3 issues within 5 weeks.

And yes absolutely there are livelihoods at stake; the OP's and their committed hard working staff mainly; which the employee seems to be putting into jeopardy.

And I don't have a willy. So perhaps leave yours outside the office eh? It's completely inappropriate language and shows your lack of professionalism to even mention your willy and what you do with it.

How do you know I have a willy? Or an office for that matter? :rotfl: It's a figure of speech. You may consider it inappropriate for the internet, but if so i reckon that makes 99.99% of the internet inappropriate. Perhaps David Cameron could ask the ISPs to filter it for you? Anyway, I'll say again, let's not get distracted from helping the OP.

You take a very short sighted view on this. As I (and you) have said, there are livelihoods at stake. Potentially damaging the business through poor management is not the way forward. So OP needs to think through carefully what to do about this issue, as sacking this person could have unintended consequences short and long term. As we don't know the exact details, it's a poor show to recommend sacking this employee without being sure that OP has considered all possibilities first.

Funky_Bold_Ribena

Southend1 wrote: »

How do you know I have a willy? Or an office for that matter? :rotfl: It's a figure of speech. You may consider it inappropriate for the internet, but if so i reckon that makes 99.99% of the internet inappropriate. Perhaps David Cameron could ask the ISPs to filter it for you? Anyway, I'll say again, let's not get distracted from helping the OP.

You take a very short sighted view on this. As I (and you) have said, there are livelihoods at stake. Potentially damaging the business through poor management is not the way forward. So OP needs to think through carefully what to do about this issue, as sacking this person could have unintended consequences short and long term. As we don't know the exact details, it's a poor show to recommend sacking this employee without being sure that OP has considered all possibilities first.

By the time you have had all your training sessions, been through your own disciplinary for unprofessional 'figures of speech', re-evaluated the situation, and taken time away from your actual business and spent good money after bad; I'd have got rid and employed someone who is competent at the job in hand and who isn't going to lose my customers and create internal problems.

That's just the way it goes.

Southend1

Funky_Bold_Ribena wrote: »

By the time you have had all your training sessions, been through your own disciplinary for unprofessional 'figures of speech', re-evaluated the situation, and taken time away from your actual business and spent good money after bad; I'd have got rid and employed someone who is competent at the job in hand and who isn't going to lose my customers and create internal problems.

That's just the way it goes.

Unfortunately for the want of talking to someone for 15 minutes and spending another 10 minutes thinking though the situation you would just as likely find yourself with another member of staff who isn't performing as expected. Wasting time and money on recruitment, and running the business below it's potential in the process.

A good manager will have more tools in his box than just hiring and firing.

Hopefully however OP will see the benefit in assessing the situation properly before acting. The fact that he has come to this forum and asked the question suggests he probably will.

I've never read any books on management that recommend acting rashly over making reasoned decisions based on all available information.

Funky_Bold_Ribena

Southend1 wrote: »

Unfortunately for the want of talking to someone for 15 minutes and spending another 10 minutes thinking though the situation you would just as likely find yourself with another member of staff who isn't performing as expected. Wasting time and money on recruitment, and running the business below it's potential in the process.

A good manager will have more tools in his box than just hiring and firing.

Hopefully however OP will see the benefit in assessing the situation properly before acting. The fact that he has come to this forum and asked the question suggests he probably will.

I've never read any books on management that recommend acting rashly over making reasoned decisions based on all available information.

I know the tools that a manger has in her toolkit thanks. OP is a female and runs a cleaning company; and I would imagine that she probably hasn't got a huge wedge sat there that can be spent faffing around for months trying to manage a PITA employee and needs to step up to the plate and manage that person up or out. As I have said - if it was one thing, or two then I'd recommend managing them up. But all 3 in 5 weeks, I'd recommend managing them out and pronto.

We are just going to have to differ on this one.

Southend1

Funky_Bold_Ribena wrote: »

I know the tools that a manger has in her toolkit thanks. OP is a female and runs a cleaning company; and I would imagine that she probably hasn't got a huge wedge sat there that can be spent faffing around for months trying to manage a PITA employee and needs to step up to the plate and manage that person up or out. As I have said - if it was one thing, or two then I'd recommend managing them up. But all 3 in 5 weeks, I'd recommend managing them out and pronto.

We are just going to have to differ on this one.

Knowing them and knowing how to use them to best effect are two different things.

The three things you keep referring to could easily be one minor incident- and the reason it/they occurred could be more about OP's management skills than the employee's competence. We just don't know. I stand by the point I have made repeatedly here: to make such a drastic recommendation as firing an employee without knowing the full situation or that OP has tried all reasonable techniques to manage her staff is irresponsible.

Agreed, that we will have to differ on this one. :beer:

ValHaller

Funky_Bold_Ribena wrote: »

I know the tools that a manger has in her toolkit thanks. OP is a female and runs a cleaning company; and I would imagine that she probably hasn't got a huge wedge sat there that can be spent faffing around for months trying to manage a PITA employee and needs to step up to the plate and manage that person up or out. As I have said - if it was one thing, or two then I'd recommend managing them up. But all 3 in 5 weeks, I'd recommend managing them out and pronto.

We are just going to have to differ on this one.

Always always always an employee is entitled to due process, whether they have been there 5 minutes or lasted until lunchtime

It never is as simple as deciding they are lying or doing it wrong. They need to be confronted and given the opportunity to explain (they could actually be telling the truth or have been misled by a savvy employee who feels threatened) and an opportunity to demonstrate they have learned.

I would agree with having them on a short lead after that if they are very new. but if you don't engage with them you might miss some truth about your own business.