Firing people - is it ever right?

[jæd]

lol @ all the managers spending all day on urban arguing over managing

Seems more like the students arguing about managers who have to deal with reality...

 

[EastEnder]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying people should ever be fired on a whim, and yes, it's an extreme measure, but sometimes isn't it fair to 'just know' that someone will never improve after say, a month of shite?

That's why many companies have probation periods. Where I work, everyone starts on a 3 month probation - your contract doesn't become fully permanent until after the 3 months. If you can't tell whether someone's up to the job within 3 months, they must be doing a really good job of pretending. And if someone's been with a company for a lot longer, then presumably they could do the job beforehand, so any recent problems would be suggestive of some new issue - maybe they're stressed or depressed or something - it's not like they just suddenly stopped being capable of doing what they used to do.

 

[poster342002]

Seems more like the students arguing about managers who have to deal with reality...

That old cliche... any minute now we'll get that "hilarious" photo of Rik Mayall posted up again.

 

[poster342002]

That's why many companies have probation periods.

Also a handy way of having a "revolving door workforce" where few people are able to stay long enough to qualify for employment rights as they're conveniently deemed to have failed their probation (and subsequent "chances to improve performance" run by the same judge, jury and executioner)...

 

[ChrisFilter]

That's why many companies have probation periods. Where I work, everyone starts on a 3 month probation - your contract doesn't become fully permanent until after the 3 months. If you can't tell whether someone's up to the job within 3 months, they must be doing a really good job of pretending. And if someone's been with a company for a lot longer, then presumably they could do the job beforehand, so any recent problems would be suggestive of some new issue - maybe they're stressed or depressed or something - it's not like they just suddenly stopped being capable of doing what they used to do.

Indeed, but being fired during probation is still being fired.

Otherwise I'd completely agree.

 

[EastEnder]

Also a handy way of having a "revolving door workforce" where few people are able to stay long enough to qualify for employment rights as they're conveniently deemed to have failed their probation (and subsequent "chances to improve performance" run by the same judge, jury and executioner)...

It has definite potential for abuse, but I think a lot depends on the company. The probation thing seems to work ok here - I can only recall one person who got fired during their probation period, but that was for a genuinely serious incident. I'm ambivalent, I can see a case for probationary periods so long as they're fair & justified and explicitly not used as a way of conveniently denying peoples rights, but on the other hand I've been there myself so know what it's like - I was horribly ill during my first 10 days here, but dragged myself into work every day because I knew I was on probation, and even though I was more than justified in calling in sick, I knew I could be fired at will....

 

[fractionMan]

Also a handy way of having a "revolving door workforce" where few people are able to stay long enough to qualify for employment rights as they're conveniently deemed to have failed their probation (and subsequent "chances to improve performance" run by the same judge, jury and executioner)...

Depends on the job. In my industry (computers etc) it takes about 3 months to get anyone new up to speed on the systems they'll be working on. If they haven't got it in 3 months, they'll never get it and have to go. Peeps that get it are never let go with a revolving workforce approach cos it'd be a waste of 3 months training.

But yeah, I can see how it would be abused in other situations.

 

[mrsfran]

I take personal responsibility for my work - if it's not good enough, that's my fault. If I need training, I should ask for it. If I've got personal problems, I should explain them. And if I fuck up, or I'm rude or surly or unable to cope despite help being given, I shouldn't be doing that job.

I have been fired from jobs for not being good enough. Fair enough, I was taking the piss. You take the piss, you get fired. Simple.

 

[Skimix]

I must be lucky as I've never worked for a company for any length of time that's as shit as some of you portray!!

Yeah exactly. I don't think I've ever been in a situation where anyone has been fired or bullied!

 

[Stobart Stopper]

I'd say that it's often perfectly acceptable to fire people. Do others agree or disagree?

I agree. If someone is lazy and useles then get rid of them and get someone better. I can't stand lazy, bone-idle twats.

 

[trashpony]

My old boss got fired. Something to do with a million pounds overspent on a budget ...

 

[felixthecat]

lol @ all the managers spending all day on urban arguing over managing

Don't manage any more (except for myself). Didn't like it - I NEED to be hands on.

 

[Cheesypoof]

I'd say that it's often perfectly acceptable to fire people. Do others agree or disagree?

agree.

 

[Kanda]

lol @ all the managers spending all day on urban arguing over managing

I manage a network

 

[Skimix]

I'd say that it's often perfectly acceptable to fire people. Do others agree or disagree?

Of course it's ok.

 

[Geri]

What if someone is really trying their very best, but simply isn't up to the job? You can't make people do something they aren't capable of.

 

[_pH_]

Yes. In my job a serious breach of safety rules = instant dismissal.

A different company who do similar work fired someone recently for felling a tree onto a live 33kV powerline (they straight-felled it apparently instead of sectioning it down as you're supposed to in the circumstances). The twat tried to cover it up by clearing up the mess, then reporting it at 12.15. Trouble was (for him), the electricity company's control room had it on their system that the line tripped out at 9.10........

 

[Yossarian]

I'd say that it's often perfectly acceptable to fire people. Do others agree or disagree?

I agree completely - I've gotten fired in the past when statements of mine like "Of course I know how to mix complicated cocktails" or "Of course I've used an industrial paint sprayer before" or "Yes, I'll come to work tomorrow" have been proven to be blatantly false, and I would call all those firings and many more like them completely justified.

 

[Khan Unis]

What if someone is really trying their very best, but simply isn't up to the job? You can't make people do something they aren't capable of.

I agree.
Unfortunately in life there are lazy people, and people who let the rest of the team down, and who put everybody else at risk of unemployment, or force their to work longer hours to make up the work.
As attractive as the notion of a socialist utopia is, in most cases in reality people often have to be fired for the good of the entire workforce.
All too often this is not the fault of the bosses, there seems to be an increasing culture of laziness in the UK, perhaps its all the binge drinking!!!
I think some of the reactions in this and the other thread bordered on the hysterical though this may be because of previous trouble on this website. Seems to be a lot of chips on peoples shoulders here! Chill out!

 

[Oletjo]

If someone hates there job enough to put themselves in a position they get fired, maybe you should be looking at the employer, not the employee.

 

[ChrisFilter]

What if someone is really trying their very best, but simply isn't up to the job? You can't make people do something they aren't capable of.

They'll never be fulfilled in the job anyway... a sacking could be a blessing in disguise. Unless on the breadline, of course.

 

[girasol]

If someone can't do their job properly they need training, not firing.

Words. Mouth.

A better justification for firing someone is when they can do their job properly but just don't for no other reason other that they don't want to do it, or whey they use their time at work to do something else...

Not that I'm advocating the culture of overtime, working late and blind dedication to work that I see so much of - work-life balance and all that.

For people who do their job well and still have to work lots of hours: I hope they're getting overtime, a big bonus or a very good salary (and if that's not the case stop working so hard (unless they love it )!!!)

// end of rant

 

[EastEnder]

Words. Mouth.

A better justification for firing someone is when they can do their job properly but just don't for no other reason other that they don't want to do it, or whey they use their time at work to do something else...

In principle, those sort of situations should be straight forward to deal with - so long as a proper contract exists, detailing the persons role, responsibilities, obligations, etc, it should just be a matter of following proper procedures. If they're not fulfilling their contractual obligations and there's no valid reason why not, then it's justification for a written warning, formal interview, etc, etc - whatever the appropriate procedures of the company are. And such procedures should always give them the chance to justify their performance and the opportunity to improve. At my work they've got a very fair system, if someone's performance falls way below what's expected, they get a first warning, which results in a plan of action - agreed with the staff member - that outlines what they're going to do over the coming weeks/months to address the problem. And very importantly, that first formal warning process gives the staff member the chance to explain problems they may have with the job/company - lack of training, issues with colleagues, or more personal issues such as problems at home, health issues, depression, etc. If you're totally fair and open about the process, most situations can be dealt with, and assuming you've followed all the correct procedures, been totally up front and addressed any concerns the person has and given them every opportunity to improve, then after all that if they're still no better, maybe it's time to call it a day.

I'm lucky enough to work for a company that does play by the rules and will do the right thing, but of course I realise there's many, many companies that don't and only pay lip service to proper procedures and treat people like crap.

 

[denniseagle]

What if someone is really trying their very best, but simply isn't up to the job? You can't make people do something they aren't capable of.

Then, quite frankly , if they are truly incapable, they should be dismissed.
I 'employ' a mechanic to service my car, if his inability to perform the required servicing results in my car being unsafe to use, I would expect his employment to be terminated.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Well, if the people have been there long enough to have some rights (1 year?) then you should do all is possible to make it work in my opinion.

Lazy people with attitude problems could maybe be someone depressed or suffering in some other way that could need help. Just firing them is cuntish, help them if you can, follow procedure. Probation periods etc should weed out the naturally shit people shouldn't it?? Even so, if someone had problems on probation, I'd rather try find out and address them than just say: 'Oh fuck off, you're shit'.

Your tagline: it's like a little mini callout, all on its own.

 

[Khan Unis]

In a perfect world with no deadlines or financial pressures, the line manager or supervisor or boss would have the time or inclination to sit the troubled employee down and play psychotherapist in attempt to get to the root of the problems.

In reality, the unreliable lazy and late arriving employee is just dead weight, dragging everyone else down.
No amount of tenderness shown by said boss will eradicate the sense of resentment felt by the co-workers toward lazy employees, and to show undue favoritism toward those unable to complete their basic job description is an insult to those who do their job with no problems.
I have hired, fired, and been fired, none of it is easy but it does build up your sense of responsibility.

The reason I am here in fact is because I may have to fire someone soon myself, though judging by the reactions here I should tread cautiously!
I work for a struggling design agency, 12 people multitasking to keep what little business we have.
My problem?
She is a spoiled, lazy, rude, typical Chelsea set brat, her rich lawyer daddy bought her a brand new car for Xmas and her idol is literally Paris Hilton.
She spends all day texting her friends, when threatened with phone ban she walked out and took a three hour lunch, returning with various Prada and Karen Millen bags and parading hundreds of pounds of fashion ware in front of furious coworkers who had to cover her work through lunch!

She was hired by my boss as a favour to his rich lawyer friend and he has now made her my problem.

Should I kill myself as suggested on another thread or play counciller to her to understand the root of her problems?
If so, why?

 

[playghirl]

Done it three times meself- had to!!

 

[equationgirl]

I believe there is a different between someone who can't do their job, and someone who won't.

Let's just say there are a couple of people where I work who believe themselves to be indispensable and may shortly be disabused of this notion...

 

[panpete]

Agree - Business cant afford to lose money through inefficient/unreliable or whatever other reason.

 

[Funky_monks]

I manage fish.

And if those trout dont do exactly as their told..............