Other Resources My Cup of Joe » Ethics Concerns Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller Reply
2009-07-30 5:32 AM

User image

Master
2665
20005001002525
The Whites, New Hampshire
Subject: Ethics Concerns
Maybe I'm lucky. I'm sure this is totally minor compared to what others go through. But I have never had my workplace ethics so challenged before, and I don't know what to do.

I am a shift supervisor. It's just my coworker and me working long nights. It's time for me to write her review. No problem - she's a great employee, been here over ten years, is a good hard worker-bee. No, she ain't winning a Fulbright anytime soon, but neither is she gonna get nominated for the Darwin Awards. She does her job, and she does it well.

Of course, we ALL have hiccups. She's got 'em, same as everyone. I included what we've been working on, where she could improve (and how she's already improving), and what she's accomplished, on her review.

Yeah, they butchered it. They (being my department supervisor who has seen my co-worker perhaps once in the last year, I kid you not; and the HR director who, to his credit, does see her slightly more often, but never knows what she does) have forced me to write things I absolutely do NOT agree with. For one, I was taught to NEVER put something on a review that the employee was unaware of. They've forced me to include two pretty major things of which we were both unaware. They've knocked down every single one of her "excellent", "generally excellent" and top numerical marks. My boss claims that means she has no room to improve - well, she's doing a cracker-jack job, she doesn't NEED to improve in those areas!

I tried to protest. Problem is, these two people REFUSE to believe I have ANY experience before coming to this company. You know, my two and a half years running an HR department. Oh, and about ten years cumulative of supervisory experience. And...well...you get the point. So I get the patronizing smile and the pat on the head and the "yes, Slugger, that's lovely, now do what we say."

Thing is, this isn't worth losing my job over. It isn't worth quitting my job over. But they will - and have, obliquely - threatened my job if I don't comply. What do I do? I can't "file a formal complaint" - there's no formal complaint to file, and if I did, it would just go to the HR director! There's no getting around him (yes, my company is THAT f'ed up). I even suggested removing my name from the eval - no go. I suggested initialing whose additions were whose - no go.

I'm in a serious bind - my ethics are SCREAMING that this eval is wrong, wrong wrong. It has LIES in my opinion (they've knocked her scores down so low) and has a whole lot of this-is-how-you-do-an-eval screw-ups. What do I do? Sit down, shut up, and take it? I've already told my co-worker what is going on. Her response? "Every shift leader I've ever had has said the same thing." F that.

Suggestions on how to muddle through this situation with my ethics not TOO badly compromised?

In the meantime, anyone looking to hire an ETHICAL, EXPERIENCED worker who'll bust my chops, expect those around me to bust their chops, but will most cerainly give praise where praise is due?


2009-07-30 5:55 AM
in reply to: #2316577

User image

Pro
6767
500010005001001002525
the Alabama part of Pennsylvania
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
I would suggest refusing to put your name or signature on a report you disagree with.  Or possibly ataching an addendum that indicates what you have rated her.  If you can't work within the company, what about your state labor relations board?  There is always someone above to report to, either within or outside a company. 

To the boss that says you can't rate someone as excellent or generally excellent, I would ask for specific benchmarks to reach those points.  Then at least there is a clear, measurable goal to use in that measure.  Otherwsie, it is like my wife's (Catholic) HS math teacher, who would never give anyone 100 or 99% on a test.  Because 100% meant perfect, and only God is perfect.  And 99% is too close.  (I told her if it had been me, I would have asked if God himself wrote the test).

My other thought is if the company is trying to build a paper trail to get rid of her? How is the company doing overall?  Are there layoffs in the foreseeable future?

Ironically, I am going to be meeting today with my department chair about one of the members of my inpatient team and his supervisor about his performance.  The team member and his direct supervisor know that the big boss has taken a dislike to him, for no clear reason, even though he never has to work with the guy.  I am expecting to hear a litany of perceived vague flaws.  Hopefully the supervisor and I can adequately be heard about our hands-on experience working with him.  I am in a similar boat as you, having had 15 years of working in this job, with a long string of people in his position, some of whom have been terrible and some good.  He has been the best "fit" in the team overall. At least I will not expected to produce any sort of written or signed document.
2009-07-30 8:01 AM
in reply to: #2316577

User image

Master
3546
2000100050025
Millersville, MD
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
At least you were able to tell her and she took it well.  Now whether that was ethical or not is another complex issue.

I think you summed it up when you said it "wasn't worth" losing your job.  You've got competing interests, and you have to decide which is more important.  In this case, I don't fault you for choosing yourself and then doing damange control as much as possible regarding the other [losing] interests.

If it was me, I wouldn't rock the boat any more than you already have.  I might start looking for something else and take it when I found it, but for now the writing on the wall has been pretty clear for you.
2009-07-30 9:18 AM
in reply to: #2316577

User image

Extreme Veteran
586
500252525
Edgewater, CO
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
My guess is that they either need to 1) create a paper trail to fire her, and/or 2) Set her up to get no bonus/significant raise.
2009-07-30 9:24 AM
in reply to: #2316764

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.
2009-07-30 9:31 AM
in reply to: #2316577

Alpharetta, Georgia
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
Slugger - 2009-07-30 5:32 AM
They've knocked down every single one of her "excellent", "generally excellent" and top numerical marks. My boss claims that means she has no room to improve - well, she's doing a cracker-jack job, she doesn't NEED to improve in those areas!



It really irritates me that employees in some companyes aren't "allowed" to get the higest marks. My first two evaluations in my job were almost all of the highest marks. Got a new manager and his first evaluation of me knocked down most of the highest marks to the next-highest marks, citing that he really felt I was doing the work of the higest marks, but the company was making them mark people lower so they could have room to improve. So what happens next year when I DO improve? Mark me high and then have to knock me down again the next time? It doens't make any sense, and really discourages employees from striving to be the best, when it's an impossible goal to achieve. Literally impossible.

In my experience, 99% of managers and companies have NO IDEA how to properly use evauluations and performance management systems. It's a complete joke.

 

Edited by lisac957 2009-07-30 9:32 AM


2009-07-30 10:05 AM
in reply to: #2316577

Pro
4189
20002000100252525
Pittsburgh, my heart is in Glasgow
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
Do you think that they could be trying to find a way to fire/lay off this person? What if this is the beginning of a movement to push her out by giving consistently (falsely) low reviews? If so...definitely try to establish some sort of paper trail so that they would have recourse for unreasonable dismissal.
2009-07-30 10:30 AM
in reply to: #2316577

Champion
7036
5000200025
Sarasota, FL
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns

I worked at a place where HR did a forced normal distribution on performance ratings.  Had nothing to do with how well someone actually did their job -  you had lots of people who were doing a great job who still got rated "average".  The company claimed they wanted to leave room at the top for the "superstars"  (most of whom were 1st class suck-ups).

Unfortunately you have two choices, go along with the program or leave (either voluntarily or otherwise).

Given the current economy, just make sure that you have viable options if you decide to leave.

Mark

 

  

2009-07-30 10:35 AM
in reply to: #2316999

Expert
2547
200050025
The Woodlands, TX
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
jneugeba - 2009-07-30 9:18 AM My guess is that they either need to 1) create a paper trail to fire her, and/or 2) Set her up to get no bonus/significant raise.


X2. A harsh eval is a great way to justify no raise in pay. Common tactic.
2009-07-30 10:39 AM
in reply to: #2316577

Master
1790
1000500100100252525
Tyler, TX
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
I think that that your superiors have the right to add incidents or comments to your employee's evaluation because it gives a more full picture of the emploee's performance.  While it is typical that you'd do the evalutation without input from your supervisors, there is no reason that they shouldn't have the right to also add their input.  It they want you to add incidences you were not aware of, it is reasonable to ask that they also sign the evalulation.

Your company should probably have better guidelines as to what constitutes "excellent", "generally excellent", etc., particularly if it influences pay raises or promotions.  Most people who do their jobs adequately (show up on time, get done what needs to get done, etc.) shouldn't get more than an "average".  "Excellent" should be reserved for those who perform above and beyond expectations and should be getting a higher than average raise and/or a promotion.

In the end, your superiors don't think that your initial evaluation was reflective of the employee's true performance.  If the employee is truly a superstar, I'd make a big deal about this.  If not, it's not worth making waves.

Brian 
2009-07-30 10:47 AM
in reply to: #2316577

Veteran
738
50010010025
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
All I can say is that is messed up and it pisses me off that your company is putting you in this situation.  I'll bet the people above you get some sort of bonus on cost cutting/future cost cutting...that doesn't even trickle down to you (not that you would accept it under these circumstances since you are telling us you are in an ethical bind), but you have to play a part in their evil scheme just to live.  With that sort of corporate mentality, even the way-higher-ups are probably in on it and want it to happen to justify their pay.  AHHHHHH.  It makes me angry. 


2009-07-30 11:31 AM
in reply to: #2316577

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.
2009-07-30 11:32 AM
in reply to: #2317261

Pro
4612
20002000500100
MA
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
RedCorvette - 2009-07-30 11:30 AM

I worked at a place where HR did a forced normal distribution on performance ratings.  Had nothing to do with how well someone actually did their job -  you had lots of people who were doing a great job who still got rated "average".  The company claimed they wanted to leave room at the top for the "superstars"  (most of whom were 1st class suck-ups).

Unfortunately you have two choices, go along with the program or leave (either voluntarily or otherwise).

Given the current economy, just make sure that you have viable options if you decide to leave.

Mark

   



Do we work in the same company? 
2009-07-30 11:41 AM
in reply to: #2316577

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.
2009-07-30 1:14 PM
in reply to: #2316999

Champion
10471
500050001001001001002525
Dallas, TX
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
jneugeba - 2009-07-30 9:18 AM

My guess is that they either need to 1) create a paper trail to fire her, and/or 2) Set her up to get no bonus/significant raise.


Pretty much... they are obviously wanting her scores lower for some reason unknown to you.

It really sucks though. It sounds like they are going to do what they want to do. The question is this... are you willing to lose a job over it?


2009-07-30 11:14 PM
in reply to: #2316577

Master
2665
20005001002525
The Whites, New Hampshire
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
Thanks for your input. Ugh. I was FUMING over this all morning and then on the drive in tonight. I'm trying to let it go, though...deeeeeeeeep breath....

Thing is, I don't think they are trying to fire her at all. Hers is one of the FEW jobs that has only been threatened once or twice (yes, yes the entire management team really does use job threatening as a "motivator"). They are just under this f'ed up notion that you have to have "room to improve". BS, I call it.

If your kid was on a soccer team, doing a fine job, getting to every practice, making every game, riding the pine when needed, jumping in when needed, working to the best ability, and the coach was constantly saying "Not good enough, nope, do better, not good enough, I can't tell you that was an AWESOME play because then you won't work hard next time" - how long would your kid stay on that team? Not saying your kid deserves to win every award at the year-end banquet, but a "nice job" would go a long way.

As an update, I returned the eval with suggested change with minor tweaks (having a strong command of the language is useful in this case, if only to me...) and a note on it saying that I strongly disagreed with the changes. At least I've said my piece. I'm SURE it will come back on my eval. So be it. In the meantime, my resume is out.

And I was just getting them convinced to do the bike commuter stimulus thing. *sigh*


2009-07-31 7:34 AM
in reply to: #2318724

Expert
937
50010010010010025
Traverse Cityish
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
Slugger - 2009-07-31 12:14 AM

(yes, yes the entire management team really does use job threatening as a "motivator"). They are just under this f'ed up notion that you have to have "room to improve". BS, I call it.


Yikes! Good call on looking elsewhere, an organization that only believes in negative reinforcement is not a place I'd want to work for.
2009-07-31 9:26 AM
in reply to: #2318915

Pro
6767
500010005001001002525
the Alabama part of Pennsylvania
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
Nelg - 2009-07-31 8:34 AM
Slugger - 2009-07-31 12:14 AM (yes, yes the entire management team really does use job threatening as a "motivator"). They are just under this f'ed up notion that you have to have "room to improve". BS, I call it.
Yikes! Good call on looking elsewhere, an organization that only believes in negative reinforcement is not a place I'd want to work for.


I'm not 100% sure it is negative reinforcement, but it is having the same end result.

[nerdy shrink lecture] Negative reinforcement is having an unpleasant antecedent set of conditions that are intended to change a behavior.  Common examples within the child psych world are nagging by parents or whining by kids.  The child wants to escape the nagging, the parent wants to escape the whining.  Unfortunately, any behavior that succeeds in this goal will become reinforced.  So if the parent gives in to the whining, the child will continue to use whining to manipulate parental behaviors (i.e. buying stuff).  While parents hope that the nagging will lead to doing the chore, the child also learns to use other escape behaviors - arguing back, claiming the chore was already done, promising to do the chore later.  any of these will end the nagging for now, and will therefore be the behavior that is reinforced.
In this workplace example, the employees learn to either disregard the negative antecedent (a phenomenon known as "learned helplessness" - akin to giving up since nothing ends the negative conditions, or to escape in other ways (like looking for a new job that uses positive reinforcement or other clear benchmarking approaches to acheive desired behaviors). But the company's supposed goal of getting the best work out of people will rarely be acheived. [/nerdy shrink lecture off]
2009-07-31 5:38 PM
in reply to: #2316577

Elite
4547
2000200050025
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
Slugger, I feel for you. Middle management can be a real punch in the %^&*#!

It seems like you've made a good call. Nice work.
2009-08-01 8:45 AM
in reply to: #2316577


602
500100
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
Its pretty simple really.

You ask the managment for specific areas in which they commented on, you do this in non-threatening or argumentative manner and just explain that she probably will want to discuss this. With them not giving you the proper information they are putting you out there, as performing this eval without alot of information and by doing so they  are undermining your position.

Then you sit down with her and be honest about it. You explain that you see her as this, what you see is "this" and what areas your thoughts are regarding improving, where she is going, goals and what she has accomplished etc. You also just inform her that there have been some changes made by management. You inform them of theif philosophy about needing a goal to improve or something else. 

If she has been there for that long, and has any inkling as an employee of what is happening above her she will  accept your review as what it is. What you talk about doesnt have to be on that paper.

I have to write a lot of them, working in state job a vast range of performance abilities. I always  try to find at least ONE area they get an exceeds expectations on. Out of the 65 or so different areas Im rating them on, there has to be something they do above. Sometimes they get a really poor one, I will throw them a bone on some area. I have to hit them pretty hard in some areas and use the exceeds to motivate them and bring them back up "you do this really well, if you put this much effort in these other areas you would be this much stronger all around....."
2009-08-02 9:19 PM
in reply to: #2316577

New user
153
1002525
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
and weren't we all just saying how terrible unions were not too long ago...I think i would explain it to this person and try to find a new job because it could be you next time for the eval.


2009-08-03 12:37 AM
in reply to: #2321143

Master
2665
20005001002525
The Whites, New Hampshire
Subject: RE: Ethics Concerns
Thanks again, everyone. I took many, many deep breaths and a good hard ride on my pretty bike.

gearboy, you (of course) are right on. When I worked at a boarding school for ADHD (plus everything else) middle school boys, we all knew that like the back of our hands. It helps to see it for what it is, and I thank you for that.

Garceau - 2009-08-01 9:45 AM
I always  try to find at least ONE area they get an exceeds expectations on. Out of the 65 or so different areas Im rating them on, there has to be something they do above. Sometimes they get a really poor one, I will throw them a bone on some area. I have to hit them pretty hard in some areas and use the exceeds to motivate them and bring them back up

You and me, same philosophy. I've always demanded a LOT of the people I work with (and, obviously, myself), but I also praise them as loudly as my soccer-goalie-developed diaphragm will allow. Then, I try to show them new methods to improve the areas they need to improve. And always ask that they tell me where I can improve to help both of us do our jobs better. She knows where she stands with me, and I know where I stand with her, and in the end, that's all that matters.
New Thread
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » Ethics Concerns Rss Feed