[Closed] Work restructure issue - ASKING FOR A FRIEND

Bumpy still needed?

What does "under disciplinary" mean?

I've only ever heard of disciplinary action being a point-in-time event, a review of your actions which may or may not result in a warning or worse.

EDIT friend half wants to walk out and could afford to

Walk out.

It is Not worth the stress if friend can afford to walk.

Life is short.
Life is precious.
Enjoy while still can.
Don't slave for the job.

I have seen colleagues worked till their retirement age and by the time they retired they no longer had the time to enjoy. Most regretted coz Grim Reaper is waiting.

Where I work the way to climb the corporate ladder is to step on or back stab others.

We used to have PIPs. Performance improvement plans.

The idea being that you work with the person to get them up to standard. This would mean frequent performance reviews and coaching. Done before any further action was taken regarding dismissal or change in job roles.

Generally they happened for two reasons. One was someone struggling after change in job role or you'd find out it was something outside of normal work affecting performance. Setting similar in most big companies I believe. You need to document and take positive steps to address underperformance.

In answer to the OP, the best job in the world will be grim if the culture is. There's nothing to stop you looking externally while this process continues.

friend half wants to walk out and could afford to

Do it. Not worth the stress and hassle. I'm going through yet another restructure, I looked at walking. It was very close but I can tell for certain this is my last restructure I will go through.

In any restructure I've ever been involved in the new structure has already been pretty much predetermined bar any real surprise of someone not applying for the new position they were expected to or walking.

For any new position the interviews and the scoring are weighted to ensure that the chosen candidate succeeds and they can 'prove' the process was 'fair'.

After all, as a company you would not embark on a restructure without a clear idea what the new structure will look like.

Poking around will sadly be unlikely to get your friend anywhere other than more wound up about things than they already are.

@cougar you may be right, I'm just told he has been shit at his job since inception and management has welcomed evidence of that

Management have made their decision. Either accept or move on, just do t sit there pondering as it will only be detrimental to you

Poking around will sadly be unlikely to get your friend anywhere other than more wound up about things than they already are.

Completely agree. Sadly, it sounds like she is relatively junior in the company, at least in the context that she has not been involved in the decision making and doesn't have the authority to just ask about the process.

So yes, she could leave - but unless she makes a change in her line of work/seniority, it will likely be the same story elsewhere as this is common. Not a criticism, but she sounds over-invested at work without the power to make changes, and that'll just lead to frustration.

Is this promotion into a different team? I wonder idly whether the person in question wasn't 'promoted' so much as their existing manager wanted rid.

Management have made their decision. Either accept or move on,

Sadly this. Life's too precious to waste any of it on things that wind you up.

You imply that your friend applied for the role that A was successful in getting. It might be worthwhile getting feedback from the manager(s) who led the recruitment process why she was not successful, which might help her understand areas for her to work on to develop her skills, experience and knowledge for future career development opportunities.

If the company is simply looking for a way to get rid of the bad egg, can’t they promote the bad egg into a new role and then, some time later, make that role redundant?

I used to work at a company that did that.

and she has to do that only 1/4 of the time because there are so many of As failings and she doesn’t want to be THAT person

If anything shes helped him get the position by not reporting each issue, the book definition of performance management isnt to sack people but to improve them, its possible her lack of reporting everything has been seen as an improvement in this persons performance.

is the new role for said person similar to what they were bad at? new role might have diff tasks more suited to skillset.

If I was her, id see how it goes and leave at the first sign of it going pear shaped

Thanks all. Lots of people were reporting issues about A apparently, they thought it was being taken seriously, there are issues with almost everything he does. His new role is different to his old one, however that role is shared with another, B, and is near identical to B's previous role but apparently sufficiently different to merit people having to reapply (another issue).

Friend just wants to know if they can ask for the recruitment process scores, or find some way of feeling better about the whole ****show.

@cougar several people applied unsuccessfully, all experienced, good appraisals etc, but possibly not liked by management. It's the same team. Yes the structure was clearly defined but A getting this job (even actually remaining employed) was the surprise.

Friend likes her employer but the leader of her team is not liked/respected by anyone. They are an extremely good employer in every other regard.

Perhaps A, having had to apply for the role under the restructuring, has been issued with a new contract. This new contract could come with a new 6 month probationary period that could become "useful" should they underperform within this role too.

Within probationary periods my understanding is a company doesn't need a reason to let the employee go.

Of course, then again, they may not have reissued contracts...

I find the whole thing a bit odd. Its really none of your friends business who is promoted and why. Senior managements decision even if it seems weird.

Its put up or shut up unless there is something to whistleblow on like nepotism or corruption

YOur friend could try invoking whistleblowing proceedure?

As per my earlier post. In a restructure the management in charge of it already know who they want where.

They have a solid idea of who is going to supply for which roles and who is going to be 'successful' in gaining a promotion and the whole process will be mapped out and the scoring for interviews designed to fit what they need.

As management you would not go about a restructure without having a really good idea what the result was going to be.

I've been through a couple. They're total bollocks, but they are (usually) undertaken with consultation with HR etc and the outcomes are usually pretty watertight.

Honestly, having been there the best advice I can give your friend is to not let it eat them up. Either just get on with it or look for a new job. Sounds defeatist however the chance of them uncovering a big scandal or some other dirt that will make them feel good is slim.

Thanks guys.

@tjagain they are just gutted as A's performance for 18 months has been a joke and many thought this process was designed to get him out.

@dannybgoode yes I get that I just wanted to check of there was anything to be done.

This happened a long time ago at a place I didn't work at, but which my much-loved manager had gone to. His team was very tight, and they all got on really well, except for one fairly senior bod who was, to all intents and purposes, luggage.

Said piece of luggage was called in to a meeting with the higher-ups and told, on the QT, that he had an opportunity for promotion if he led the restructuring of the team and laid off a lot of people. Being a greedy sort of fella, he accepted the offer, was the face of the layoffs and restructuring. Once all was done, he was called upstairs, congratulated on his new position and then told it was being made redundant.

she has to do that only 1/4 of the time because there are so many of As failings and she doesn’t want to be THAT person

That's a tricky place to be in. But in this case, it's also a no-win. The problem is that she now has not only covered for this clown, but set up a situation where they are in a leadership position potentially because she has covered for him.

If the perception of A (from leadership) really was that they weren't good at their job, the restructuring would have got rid of them. I would be extremely surprised if they were really on performance improvement or similar. Your mate isn't viewed as being as talented as A so didn't get the job - complaining about this will likely only make things worse, but they should be able to ask for what areas they need to improve in order to be more successful next time.

If its anything like my place then if someone is on 'disciplinary' then that might screw things up. Usually if someone is on disciplinary then they would engage the Union and then every effort is made, with all loopholes being exploited, to make it look like the person was incompetent at their job because of the management and they way they manage people. The impact is that it is virtually impossible to 'get rid of' those who are genuinely incompetent and if they are 'overlooked' for opportunities then they would be supported by the union to take the company to tribunal, and the company usually does whatever it can to avoid that. So often it's just easier to give them the job and avoid the unpleasantness and bad press of tribunal, and manage everyone else who isn't so belligerent or have cause to complain about the company or local management, or are not supported by the union and bankrolled to cause as much disruption to the company as possible.

In order for the company to actually dismiss anyone for incompetence then they would have to have demonstrated they have exhausted every effort to re-train/develop/improve the performance of the person. The problem with that is there is no mechanism to actually demonstrate that the company has done enough and invested enough time to develop the individual.

There is no way of demonstrating or determining that you have reached the end point of the process and dismissal or redundancy is the only remaining option. It just goes on for year after year after year and PIP to PIP to PIP...eventually the individual will get another job, or VS might come up and they leave with a golden handshake, and the previous management will be glad to see the back of them and to have off loaded them to someone else then they become someone else's problem. Some people make a career of doing this for years and thrive on causing as much disruption as possible. The problem for me is, as someone who has experienced this first hand, is not me...I get P'd off and frustrated with it, but its my job to manage it within the rules the company has, but its the impact on the rest of the team who have to pick up the slack and put up with the individuals behaviour while all this is going on.

But yes, probably pointless raising it as frustrating and unfair as it might be.

wobbliescott -thats just crap management