Human nature being what it is, employers can expect friction within work groups from time to time. Personality clashes and misunderstandings will strike nearly every workplace at some time. Handling that strife often requires a deft touch that rises above human nature. While a supervisor’s natural reaction may be to scold, ignore, and make life miserable for a disfavored employee, that approach has the potential to make things even worse.
A recent survey from CareerBuilder found that 27 percent of bosses surveyed had a current direct report that they wished would leave the company. The survey found that younger managers, those ages 25-34, were more likely than managers 55 and older to have an employee they would like to see gone (32 to 24 percent, respectively).
Bosses struggle with what to do when an employee’s performance and/or behavior is so bad that they would rather start over with someone new than try to reform the current employee. Forty-two percent of the managers in the survey said they are likely to issue a formal warning. But others reported taking a less direct – and potentially hazardous – approach. Besides issuing a written warning, the bosses said they resort to:
- Pointing out shortcomings in the employee’s performance more often (27 %).
- Reducing responsibilities (21 %).
- Hiring someone else to eventually replace the employee (12 %).
- Moving the employee to another work area (8 %).
- Keeping the employee out of the loop regarding new company developments (8 %).
- Communicating primarily via e-mail instead of in person or over the phone (7 %).
- Failing to invite the employee to certain meetings or involve him/her in certain projects (6 %).
- Failing to invite the employee to social gatherings with coworkers (3 %).
Legal risks
When managers and supervisors respond to a disfavored employee the wrong way, they make the employer vulnerable to legal claims. For example, a boss who points out shortcomings of the employee he or she doesn’t like while ignoring the same problems in a favored employee runs the risk of legal trouble. The problem employee’s shortcomings shouldn’t be ignored, however.
“If the feedback or criticism is a fair and constructive assessment of the employee’s work performance, then there is little risk,” says Danielle Ryman, of counsel with Perkins Coie LLP in Anchorage, Alaska. “Ideally, a supervisor will have documentation or examples supporting feedback that the employee is falling short of expectations.”
The managers in the CareerBuilder survey who have employees they wish would leave need to take action instead of just hoping their problem will go away, Ryman says. “Hoping an employee will leave is not effective management,” she says. “An employee who is falling short of performance expectations requires the supervisor’s attention, and a supervisor should consider a performance improvement plan that identifies performance deficiencies and expected improvement within a certain time period. The improvement plan should also put the employee on notice that failure to meet expectations may result in further disciplinary action, up to and including termination.”
Supervisors also need to be consistent in how they treat similarly situated employees. “This doesn’t necessarily mean that identical disciplinary measures must be taken for all involved employees, but management should consider and be able to justify why one employee was treated differently than another,” Ryman says. Inconsistent treatment of similarly situated employees can be used as evidence to support discrimination claims for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, she says.
Bosses who reduce a less-favored employee’s responsibilities as a way to push him or her out also provide ammunition for someone looking for a legal claim against the employer. “A reduction in responsibilities or exclusion from opportunities can be considered an adverse employment action even where there is no attendant decrease in compensation or title and could be offered as evidence to support an employment claim,” Ryman says.
So how should an unhappy supervisor handle a problem employee? Tackling the problems directly and documenting the process will serve the employer better than taking actions to encourage the employee to leave. “Communicate expectations, give honest and fair feedback, and document your communications with the employee,” Ryman says. “Then, if the employee is falling short of expectations, you can show why the decision was made to terminate.”
Thank you for the article. I would like some direction on how to handle an employee that knowingly writes down everything the other employees do, “for her records”. This employee says she does this to protect herself.
We don’t want to be seen as retalitory, but sometimes the situation is difficult to address in a positive manner.
The employee has turned a happy working environment into a cold, stay to yourself, don’t want to visit type of workplace because we know she is taking notes on what we say.
Any suggestions?
Clearly all of the note-taking is subtracting from productive work time. That would be my first actionable report brought to the employee’s attention through an evaluation or write-up. Perhaps a gripe session is in order and a reminder of expectations in terms of job descriptions (I am assuming her job duties do not include employer spy). Make it clear that employees will be evaluated on the quality/quantity of their work. The DOL makes it tough, but you should be able to compensate based on time worked. I would imagine that her daily work suffers because of the self-induced extra curricular activity.
And…if those “records” are made while on company time, on company stationary or computers – can the employer claim ownership of such “records” snd get them ? And what if the “ercords” are not even truthful??
One thing I notice in the reporting is that younger managers seem to have the greater problem with less-than-ideal direct reports. This lends itself to the belief that the issue is not with the direct reports, but rather with the managers lack of experience as well as the company’s lack of respect towards more seasoned employees who were overlooked for managerial positions in favor of younger, often less senior employees.
Additionally, several of the actions taken by managers (i.e. leaving those employees out of the loop and exclusion from meetings) would constitute workplace bullying if done by employees on the same level with one another, so it is bullying when done by managers to subordinates.
To chime in on Sharon Boyers’ inquiry: as long as the note-taking employee is taking care of her work, there is nothing prohibiting her from taking those notes to protect herself. Perhaps it is a situation of where she is aware of others spending more time on non-work related activities and only she is held accountable for decreased productivity if she does the same even occassionally. It has been known to happen in every workplace and no one should be made the scapegoat while others get away with anything.
Sharon,
You need to pull that employee aside and have a discussion with her that there is no feasible reason for her to spy on her fellow employees. If she wants to continue to do so, then she will be documented for unproductive behavior at work.