angry sullen employee

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord, people need lessons in reading comprehension. Does her negativity affect core performanc metrics such as professionalism and teamwork? How big is your staff? The smaller the size, the greater the effect of negativity in the office atmosphere. Is there a group norm of cheerfulness and optimism that could influence a change in her behavior? If you've exhausted all the beneficent steps (talking with her, etc), I would absolutely begin to document it if it affects performance. Employees like this usually feed on weak management and just get worse. Sorry you are dealing with this.

+1 to all of this.

Also, I think it's fairly clear that "odor" was supposed to be "aura." So many wannabe editors on this site. I actually AM an editor and I would never pick people's posts apart the way you all do.

Then you should recognize that you need a comma before the "and" to avoid a comma splice. For the record, I am NOT an editor.

NP here. A "comma splice" is the incorrect use of a comma to join two independent clauses. It is not, as you seem to think, the absence of a comma.

It's further up the post. It's actually bolded for you. Here it is again: I actually AM an editor and I would never pick people's posts apart the way you all do.

Here is an example of a comma splice:

It is raining today, I will take an umbrella to work.

You have two independent clauses joined by a coordinating conjunction. That DOES require a comma. Where did you get your credentials?

You seem very confused. There are seven coordinating conjunctions in the English language: And, but, for, nor, or, so, and yet. Where do you see a coordinating conjunction in "It is raining today, I will take an umbrella to work"? A comma splice is an error of style. The sentence really should be divided by a period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord, people need lessons in reading comprehension. Does her negativity affect core performanc metrics such as professionalism and teamwork? How big is your staff? The smaller the size, the greater the effect of negativity in the office atmosphere. Is there a group norm of cheerfulness and optimism that could influence a change in her behavior? If you've exhausted all the beneficent steps (talking with her, etc), I would absolutely begin to document it if it affects performance. Employees like this usually feed on weak management and just get worse. Sorry you are dealing with this.

+1 to all of this.

Also, I think it's fairly clear that "odor" was supposed to be "aura." So many wannabe editors on this site. I actually AM an editor and I would never pick people's posts apart the way you all do.

Then you should recognize that you need a comma before the "and" to avoid a comma splice. For the record, I am NOT an editor.

NP here. A "comma splice" is the incorrect use of a comma to join two independent clauses. It is not, as you seem to think, the absence of a comma.

It's further up the post. It's actually bolded for you. Here it is again: I actually AM an editor and I would never pick people's posts apart the way you all do.

Here is an example of a comma splice:

It is raining today, I will take an umbrella to work.

You have two independent clauses joined by a coordinating conjunction. That DOES require a comma. Where did you get your credentials?

You seem very confused. There are seven coordinating conjunctions in the English language: And, but, for, nor, or, so, and yet. Where do you see a coordinating conjunction in "It is raining today, I will take an umbrella to work"? A comma splice is an error of style. The sentence really should be divided by a period.

Clearly I am neither an editor, nor a competent DCUM user. The part where you missed the comma was much earlier in the thread. I will post it here for your review.
I actually AM an editor and I would never pick people's posts apart the way you all do.

I am going to concede defeat based on my lack of Internet expertise; however, I still believe you missed a comma earlier in the thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the editor:

Using Coordinating Conjunctions

Use coordinating conjunctions to indicate that the elements they join are equal in importance and in structure.
Definition of Coordinating Conjunctions
Coordinating conjunctions join grammatically similar elements (two nouns, two verbs, two modifiers, two independent clauses):

and
or
nor
so
but
for
yet
How to punctuate coordinating conjunctions
When a coordinating conjunction joins two independent clauses, a comma is used before the coordinating conjunction (unless the two independent clauses are very short).

Conjunctions that are not followed by non-essential elements should never be followed by commas.

Perhaps no budget is without some fat, but university officials argue that their unique function requires special standards of evaluation.


When either independent clause in a compound sentence contains a comma to set off introductory or non-essential elements, a reader may be confused by a comma before a coordinating conjunction. In this case, a semicolon may replace the comma.

The figures at elite universities, particularly, are enough to cause sticker shock; yet the current increases at many schools are the lowest in a decade.


When NOT to punctuate coordinating conjunctions
If a sentence begins with a coordinating conjunction, it is not followed by a comma

Yet the typical tenured professor's salary of $43,500 still represents 10% less buying power than the equivalent salary in 1970.


Commas are not used between two verbs, two subjects, two complements, or two objects joined by a coordinating conjunction.

That confuses most analogies between universities and profit-making enterprises. [compound object of preposition]

Endowments and gifts make up the rest. [compound subject]

Georgetown, for example, has eliminated one-third of its graduate programs in the past five years and recently decided to close its dental school. [compound verb]


— All examples taken from "Facing Up to Sticker Shock," Time (April 20, 1987), 70.

This is the most tiresome post ever posted.

[Anonymous]

You all are too funny with your comma splices and the incredibly long posts about grammar. I do not worry about such things when typing one-handed with a baby in one arm - in others' posts or in my own. Truly, get a life, but thanks for the laughs!

- the editor

[Anonymous]

So apparently OP, the way you deal with you negative employee is to become a grammar nazi...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the editor:

Using Coordinating Conjunctions

Use coordinating conjunctions to indicate that the elements they join are equal in importance and in structure.
Definition of Coordinating Conjunctions
Coordinating conjunctions join grammatically similar elements (two nouns, two verbs, two modifiers, two independent clauses):

and
or
nor
so
but
for
yet
How to punctuate coordinating conjunctions
When a coordinating conjunction joins two independent clauses, a comma is used before the coordinating conjunction (unless the two independent clauses are very short).

Conjunctions that are not followed by non-essential elements should never be followed by commas.

Perhaps no budget is without some fat, but university officials argue that their unique function requires special standards of evaluation.


When either independent clause in a compound sentence contains a comma to set off introductory or non-essential elements, a reader may be confused by a comma before a coordinating conjunction. In this case, a semicolon may replace the comma.

The figures at elite universities, particularly, are enough to cause sticker shock; yet the current increases at many schools are the lowest in a decade.


When NOT to punctuate coordinating conjunctions
If a sentence begins with a coordinating conjunction, it is not followed by a comma

Yet the typical tenured professor's salary of $43,500 still represents 10% less buying power than the equivalent salary in 1970.


Commas are not used between two verbs, two subjects, two complements, or two objects joined by a coordinating conjunction.

That confuses most analogies between universities and profit-making enterprises. [compound object of preposition]

Endowments and gifts make up the rest. [compound subject]

Georgetown, for example, has eliminated one-third of its graduate programs in the past five years and recently decided to close its dental school. [compound verb]


— All examples taken from "Facing Up to Sticker Shock," Time (April 20, 1987), 70.

This is the most tiresome post ever posted.

+1. Sad.

[Anonymous]

Getting back on topic .....

If the employee is good at her job, I don't know what you'd be documenting, exactly? Documenting a "negative attitude" to fire an otherwise competent employee seems like a one-way ticket to getting sued. If her negative attitude is toward others at the organization during meetings and such, remove her from those projects that require a lot of interaction with others. Or document how her negative attitude is negatively affecting the projects, not just the fact that she has a "bad attitude" in and of itself. If it's toward the job/the work itself, just let her be, she's probably job-hunting anyway.

[Anonymous]

NP here. I was wondering about a smell too. The OP was confusing, and I have pretty decent reading skills. Just came back to check in if it was odor. So, no odor?

[Anonymous]

yes but an employee like that brings down everyone else around her. Can you ask her what's at the root of it?

You can't fire for "sullen" in most cases, though, OP. You can document poor performance (missed deadlines, crappy work) or conduct (coming in late, sleeping on the job). Very hard to document "attitude."

[Anonymous]

Has anyone tried talking to the employee about what makes her unhappy? Is there a way that her supervisor can have a private conversation with her about her attitude without crossing a line?

Hey Larlo, I'm sensing that something seems to be wrong with you lately. You are doing a great job with your job duties. Is there something in the office environment that is making you unhappy? Is there something else going on that you'd like to share? We would like to make the workplace a positive environment for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:yes but an employee like that brings down everyone else around her. Can you ask her what's at the root of it?

You can't fire for "sullen" in most cases, though, OP. You can document poor performance (missed deadlines, crappy work) or conduct (coming in late, sleeping on the job). Very hard to document "attitude."

Why can't you fire for "sullen" or "bad attitude"? Assuming the employee is not part of a union or has some sort of contractual job protection, I was under the impression you could fire someone for any reason that's not specifically prohibited by law (i.e., illegal discrimination).

I'd definitely 1) document the problem; 2) talk to employee ("It seems like you're not happy here. . . "); 3) if it continues and has a negative impact on others, terminate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes but an employee like that brings down everyone else around her. Can you ask her what's at the root of it?

You can't fire for "sullen" in most cases, though, OP. You can document poor performance (missed deadlines, crappy work) or conduct (coming in late, sleeping on the job). Very hard to document "attitude."

Why can't you fire for "sullen" or "bad attitude"? Assuming the employee is not part of a union or has some sort of contractual job protection, I was under the impression you could fire someone for any reason that's not specifically prohibited by law (i.e., illegal discrimination).

I'd definitely 1) document the problem; 2) talk to employee ("It seems like you're not happy here. . . "); 3) if it continues and has a negative impact on others, terminate.

Yeah, being sullen is not a protected class, people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes but an employee like that brings down everyone else around her. Can you ask her what's at the root of it?

You can't fire for "sullen" in most cases, though, OP. You can document poor performance (missed deadlines, crappy work) or conduct (coming in late, sleeping on the job). Very hard to document "attitude."

Why can't you fire for "sullen" or "bad attitude"? Assuming the employee is not part of a union or has some sort of contractual job protection, I was under the impression you could fire someone for any reason that's not specifically prohibited by law (i.e., illegal discrimination).

I'd definitely 1) document the problem; 2) talk to employee ("It seems like you're not happy here. . . "); 3) if it continues and has a negative impact on others, terminate.

Yeah, being sullen is not a protected class, people.

But the employee could easily argue that the firing was based on race, sex, age, whatever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes but an employee like that brings down everyone else around her. Can you ask her what's at the root of it?

You can't fire for "sullen" in most cases, though, OP. You can document poor performance (missed deadlines, crappy work) or conduct (coming in late, sleeping on the job). Very hard to document "attitude."

Why can't you fire for "sullen" or "bad attitude"? Assuming the employee is not part of a union or has some sort of contractual job protection, I was under the impression you could fire someone for any reason that's not specifically prohibited by law (i.e., illegal discrimination).

I'd definitely 1) document the problem; 2) talk to employee ("It seems like you're not happy here. . . "); 3) if it continues and has a negative impact on others, terminate.

Yeah, being sullen is not a protected class, people.

But the employee could easily argue that the firing was based on race, sex, age, whatever.

Um, they could argue that about any firing. That's not a reason not to fire people.

[Anonymous]

Well firing someone is a big step. It has implications for the rest of the organization, and OP may find that her bosses don't have the appetite to actually follow through. And if it's a government or union job, it makes it that much more difficult.

OP if you are considering firing, meet with your HR department and make sure your own managers are in total agreement. If the fired employee sues the organization they'll blame you.