Employee thinks they are the exception

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The job performance requirements are that the the employee is IN THE OFFICE FIVE DAYS FOR THE ENTIRE DAY - they just don't want to be, and think themselves above reproach due to false praise, early in the employment. There are other boundary issues, as well, including harassing another employee (who does not look like the new employee). The employee being harassed is a top employee, who has hinted they might be leaving soon, and I fear the new employee (who likely will not stay) is the reason. The good employees don't tend to make waves or drama, but I don't think they should be punished for that.

Most places of work don't hire someone to be in the office, they hire someone to perform a task and being in the office is a required part of that. The job requirement is the reason why they have to be onsite. You can't have a remote guard or a remote janitor.

[Anonymous]

OP, are you the manager or a colleague?

Why are you losing people at an alarming rate? It can’t all be because of this new hire. That says something is wrong with the company culture, morale, management, or compensation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, are you the manager or a colleague?

Why are you losing people at an alarming rate? It can’t all be because of this new hire. That says something is wrong with the company culture, morale, management, or compensation.

I believe it is because people feel like certain employees are strong arming their way into what they want, but the employer won't bend for others, who are more devoted, productive and professional employees, with legitimate concerns - morale reasons. It is just a guess because i do not know for sure, but I am fairly sure that employees who have left have not given us the real reason/s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The job performance requirements are that the the employee is IN THE OFFICE FIVE DAYS FOR THE ENTIRE DAY - they just don't want to be, and think themselves above reproach due to false praise, early in the employment. There are other boundary issues, as well, including harassing another employee (who does not look like the new employee). The employee being harassed is a top employee, who has hinted they might be leaving soon, and I fear the new employee (who likely will not stay) is the reason. The good employees don't tend to make waves or drama, but I don't think they should be punished for that.

Most places of work don't hire someone to be in the office, they hire someone to perform a task and being in the office is a required part of that. The job requirement is the reason why they have to be onsite. You can't have a remote guard or a remote janitor.

The job listings list mode of work in its own highlighted, dedicated section - it is what most applicants consider/read first and foremost, before applying.

[Anonymous]

Not legal advice: the ADA does not control here. Title VII does. Totally different. Just FYI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, are you the manager or a colleague?

Why are you losing people at an alarming rate? It can’t all be because of this new hire. That says something is wrong with the company culture, morale, management, or compensation.

I believe it is because people feel like certain employees are strong arming their way into what they want, but the employer won't bend for others, who are more devoted, productive and professional employees, with legitimate concerns - morale reasons. It is just a guess because i do not know for sure, but I am fairly sure that employees who have left have not given us the real reason/s.

So it is an employer issue not an employee one. Management shouldn't be flexible for some but not others. Best would be if they were flexible for everyone of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The job performance requirements are that the the employee is IN THE OFFICE FIVE DAYS FOR THE ENTIRE DAY - they just don't want to be, and think themselves above reproach due to false praise, early in the employment. There are other boundary issues, as well, including harassing another employee (who does not look like the new employee). The employee being harassed is a top employee, who has hinted they might be leaving soon, and I fear the new employee (who likely will not stay) is the reason. The good employees don't tend to make waves or drama, but I don't think they should be punished for that.

Most places of work don't hire someone to be in the office, they hire someone to perform a task and being in the office is a required part of that. The job requirement is the reason why they have to be onsite. You can't have a remote guard or a remote janitor.

The job listings list mode of work in its own highlighted, dedicated section - it is what most applicants consider/read first and foremost, before applying.

Not having an actual reason is what tends to get companies in trouble either legally or because of morale issues.

[Anonymous]

D(Fire)TMFA

- Someone who has been there, done that, with an underperforming employee. We scrupulously followed requests for accommodations, performance improvement procedures, and after giving them a true chance to change their performance, terminated. Needs to happen for the good of everyone involved. The employee isn't actually in the right job, and everyone else is burdened by someone not performing well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:D(Fire)TMFA

- Someone who has been there, done that, with an underperforming employee. We scrupulously followed requests for accommodations, performance improvement procedures, and after giving them a true chance to change their performance, terminated. Needs to happen for the good of everyone involved. The employee isn't actually in the right job, and everyone else is burdened by someone not performing well.

This is exactly it - but the employee could basically get away with almost anything - anyone could at this point. It is soul sucking, and it is exactly why the people with a work ethic have been leaving - there is no reason for them to stay, because the lowest common denominator dictates the norm. It has been happening since the pandemic. It is known that our place of work simoly does not have the resources for things that certain people want. Not saying we should all be in the office 5 days, but that is what is expected, so that is what is done - by everyone but this person. They simply think the rules do not apply to them, and it is quite awful.

Again, people know what is expected when they apply - it is in plain English. There are no surprises, except what the new employee might try to pull next work day.....

[Anonymous]

*certain jobs are 5 days, not all. Those who are interested in not five days are encouraged to apply for the not 5 days in office positions, there are many of those, too!

It is known that the pay is low, and the demands are high - why on earth would someone like this even bother to apply here, at all??

Any demands made by that person are for that person's benefit, not the greater good. Any claims of work completed (including false claims) are also for that person's benefit. That person sees that management will stand on their heads, so now it is a game. It is laughable and embarrassing, quite frankly.

Different standards for the team members is probably the worst thing you can do to a team, and ultimately, to an office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:*certain jobs are 5 days, not all. Those who are interested in not five days are encouraged to apply for the not 5 days in office positions, there are many of those, too!

It is known that the pay is low, and the demands are high - why on earth would someone like this even bother to apply here, at all??

Any demands made by that person are for that person's benefit, not the greater good. Any claims of work completed (including false claims) are also for that person's benefit. That person sees that management will stand on their heads, so now it is a game. It is laughable and embarrassing, quite frankly.

Different standards for the team members is probably the worst thing you can do to a team, and ultimately, to an office.

Low pay and high demands and you wonder why people are leaving? I mean, sure, get rid of this new person that can't get with the program but I'm sure your retention issue is more than this person.

[Anonymous]

When you say, "um" "political reasons," do you mean the employess is a POC so they won't fire them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:- to long standing and strict/stringent rules/policies.....

We have a new employee that was hired under the conditions of five days in the office, 9-5 - it is the conditions under which they applied for the job, and the conditions under which they accepted the job. They have a "disability" not covered by the ADA. Other employees have the same "disability" but do not claim it, nor expect special treatment (because it is actually not a "disability").

The exceptions that this employee thinks they have are causing a problem for the other employees, especially the ones who were dedicated during covid. It is causing a morale issue - probably because the new employee was given a lot of false praise, to begin with. We are losing many employees to (places in the "industry").

The new employee thinks they are "above the law"/terms of employment, and it is causing issues. The new employee also does not respect the boundaries of the assignments (ie: time constraints and deadline demands), and claims to have "successfully finished" the work, only for the other employees to have to clean up the new employees' mess. It is causing extra work for everyone.

We have a probationary status/temp to perm policy, but the higher ups want to keep this employee for um, "political" reasons. It is causing a problem in a ripple effect, and dividing the office. What say you, if you have experienced and/or had to manage this before?

When people started accommodating the anti-maskers all rules or policies are no longer enforceable. You have to let them do what they want.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like you are not the manager, and that you don't like that this new employee is being praised while not playing by the rules that you have been bending to for years.

Or possibly these aren't rules but a culture -- and you don't like that someone is coming in and doing things differently.

It can be hard to see other people set boundaries and have those boundaries be respected, when you yourself have failed to set those same boundaries and you now feel taken advantage of.

In any case, you can keep doing your own job and not worrying about your colleague (if they are slacking, let it show, don't cover up by doing their work) -- or you can leave and get a new job. But if you are not this person's manager, this isn't your concern.

[Anonymous]

Is this employer a POC by chance?