angry sullen employee

[Anonymous]

Commas save lives. Consider:

"Let's eat, Grandma!" versus "Let's eat Grandma!"

[Anonymous]

Is she an at-will employee? If she is, she could certainly be fired for being a clubhouse cancer. Those people bring everyone down. Documentation is really only necessary to defend yourself in case of a lawsuit, e.g., she argues that you fired her based on her gender and you must prove otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Commas save lives. Consider:

"Let's eat, Grandma!" versus "Let's eat Grandma!"

LOL! We were given a book by a friend of my in-laws and there was a missing comma - It actually said "Let's go eat kids"! My husband and I couldn't stop laughing...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Of course they could argue that about any firing but saying, "I was fired because of my race!!!!" when the real reason is they were late to work all the time, their work performance was bad, weren't meeting their metrics, etc. is totally different than them saying "I was fired because of my race!!!!" and then the employer has to say, "well they had a bad attitude, I realize that's not clearly defined but trust me ..."

[Anonymous]

First try listening to her and what she is negative about. Is there an actual problem with the organization, process, culture or staff? You are the manager thus you are responsible for all of that. If talented people don't have a forum to discuss issues and start quitting they are quitting because of dysfunction and bad management.

Entertain that route first before writing off a person as a personality issue. Are other people complaining about things, or her? Is it affecting anyone's work??

[Anonymous]

Smelly subordinates are the worst.

[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."

Carla Tortelli Syndrome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First try listening to her and what she is negative about. Is there an actual problem with the organization, process, culture or staff? You are the manager thus you are responsible for all of that. If talented people don't have a forum to discuss issues and start quitting they are quitting because of dysfunction and bad management.

Entertain that route first before writing off a person as a personality issue. Are other people complaining about things, or her? Is it affecting anyone's work??

This. Has OP abandoned this thread?

[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.

NP here.

Here's the thing, yes, legally, at-will employees can be fired for all sorts of reasons.

BUT as a manager, when you fire someone, that reflects on you, especially if the employee does good work and your reason is "bad attitude." A good manager first will try to resolve issues like morale before firing people.

And if you end up having to fire another employee for actual work product issues, then you really start looking bad because, at some point, HR and your superiors are going to start wondering what's going on.

It is expensive and time-consuming to go through the process of posting for jobs, sorting through applications/resumes, interviewing, hiring new employees, training them, et cetera.

So there really are two parts to the question: 1) is it legal to fire an employee for X? and 2) is it a good idea as a manager to pursue firing an employee for X?

If the employee does good work, then I think it actually reflects badly on the manager if their first line course of action is termination for a negative attitude. Part of why companies and organizations hire managers is so that they can manage!!! And part of managing is morale and dealing with personalities.

OP, instead of looking to fire the employee in question, you should sit down and discuss morale. Find out if there is a root cause. Is the employee angry about something work-related? Can you identify the problem and work to resolve it?

If there isn't a specific problem, find a one-day training that is targeted at managing emotions in the workplace or interpersonal interactions in the workplace and tell the employee they have to do the training as part of their training plan.

If you take these steps and then find the employee is still disruptive, then if you do eventually have to fire the employee, you can show to your superiors and to HR that you exhausted all options.

It isn't as easy as you think to find an employee who does good work. If you can resolve the attitude issues, that is really the ideal. At the end of the day, that is a big part of what a manager's job is.

I can't say this enough, a manager whose first course of action is to fire an employee who does good work but seems unhappy is not a good manager.

[Anonymous]

OP, you need to address this quickly. I had a brilliant, capable employee who had an attitude of superiority and who alienated all co-workers. I let the situation go on way too long because I valued her work. Eventually I realized i I had to coach her out, and she left. It's been 6 months and I'm still repairing the damage she did to relationships between my department and others. Explain your expectations around collaboration and attitude and give her a chance to meet them, but don't drag it out.

[Anonymous]

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.

Here is an example of a comma splice:

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

Thanks for playing, though. I never would have posted this petty stuff if you hadn't felt the need to do so yourself.

+100

[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.

NP here.

Here's the thing, yes, legally, at-will employees can be fired for all sorts of reasons.

BUT as a manager, when you fire someone, that reflects on you, especially if the employee does good work and your reason is "bad attitude." A good manager first will try to resolve issues like morale before firing people.

And if you end up having to fire another employee for actual work product issues, then you really start looking bad because, at some point, HR and your superiors are going to start wondering what's going on.

It is expensive and time-consuming to go through the process of posting for jobs, sorting through applications/resumes, interviewing, hiring new employees, training them, et cetera.

So there really are two parts to the question: 1) is it legal to fire an employee for X? and 2) is it a good idea as a manager to pursue firing an employee for X?

If the employee does good work, then I think it actually reflects badly on the manager if their first line course of action is termination for a negative attitude. Part of why companies and organizations hire managers is so that they can manage!!! And part of managing is morale and dealing with personalities.

OP, instead of looking to fire the employee in question, you should sit down and discuss morale. Find out if there is a root cause. Is the employee angry about something work-related? Can you identify the problem and work to resolve it?

If there isn't a specific problem, find a one-day training that is targeted at managing emotions in the workplace or interpersonal interactions in the workplace and tell the employee they have to do the training as part of their training plan.

If you take these steps and then find the employee is still disruptive, then if you do eventually have to fire the employee, you can show to your superiors and to HR that you exhausted all options.

It isn't as easy as you think to find an employee who does good work. If you can resolve the attitude issues, that is really the ideal. At the end of the day, that is a big part of what a manager's job is.

I can't say this enough, a manager whose first course of action is to fire an employee who does good work but seems unhappy is not a good manager.

Wow. This was an excellent response. I agree with you 100% and the poster who said that this kind of employee feeds off of weak management.