Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have forced out of my agency every post-probationary, problem child I have had the misfortune to supervise. I made their professional life a living hell by enforcing against them the applicable eppes and my own professional standards.

It’s a kick in the groin when they leave for a non-sup 15, but that pain is temporary.

If they’re getting hired for non-sup 15s, then it sounds like you must be at fault here? They don’t hand that out like candy.

Not PP but they call former managers for a recommendation and they lie to get rid of them.

It’s happened to my group.

Sure it did.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have forced out of my agency every post-probationary, problem child I have had the misfortune to supervise. I made their professional life a living hell by enforcing against them the applicable eppes and my own professional standards.

It’s a kick in the groin when they leave for a non-sup 15, but that pain is temporary.

If they’re getting hired for non-sup 15s, then it sounds like you must be at fault here? They don’t hand that out like candy.

Not PP but they call former managers for a recommendation and they lie to get rid of them.

It’s happened to my group.

as a brand-new supervisor several years ago my boss informed me I would have to PIP someone.... without any opportunity to work with him I declined and took the time to get him up to par with the rest of the team, it started with a performance expectations memo. It was GRUELING and a real part-time job to document, document. It was so exhausting I was ready to just give him miniscule tasks and sit him in a corner, but as other team members were having to correct his work and take up the slack and started complaining, I had to persevere. Luckily HR was very helpful throughout the process.

He was able to turn things around and was expected to keep performance steady for another year, well he started sinking again smh. The PIP was prepared and when he was notified, decided to retire rather than improve or get fired.

Anonymous wrote:The really rotten ones do get fired. The process can be very swift if they're caught doing something unethical.

One guy I worked with was very low performing, yet thought he deserved much more. Managers put him on the sideline and he didn't like that. So he sought a promotion in another agency and got it. Within 3 months he was begging to come back because his new position required a lot more output and he could not coast anymore. Of course no one would take him back. I don't know what happened to him, but he probably took a demotion somewhere.

As for morale, it's great for everyone when the bad ones leave.

Fascinating.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have fired several FEDS as a sup and the trick is to involve HR early...a lot of people will document however they will just file it away and not involve HR at all and then just dump it all on HR at once to take action. If you let HR help guide you it one establishes the conduct early, and as you ramp up the pressure the employee will run to HR and if you beat them to the punch then they have already lost.

It really comes down to that most poor performers cannot get out of their own way so once you ramp up the pressure they will do something obvious to get themselves fired i.e. ignore clear direction several times, come in late, be awol, drink of the job, etc. I have seen it several times. If they turn around then its a win-win

Ramping up the pressure so people will fail sounds kinda… hostile.

(NP) No, the person has already failed. Ramping up the pressure is just the process to get them to leave.

And I echo what a pp said, making a poor performer go does nothing but help morale. It's like releasing toxin.

The really rotten ones do get fired. The process can be very swift if they're caught doing something unethical.

One guy I worked with was very low performing, yet thought he deserved much more. Managers put him on the sideline and he didn't like that. So he sought a promotion in another agency and got it. Within 3 months he was begging to come back because his new position required a lot more output and he could not coast anymore. Of course no one would take him back. I don't know what happened to him, but he probably took a demotion somewhere.

As for morale, it's great for everyone when the bad ones leave.

Anonymous wrote:I have fired several FEDS as a sup and the trick is to involve HR early...a lot of people will document however they will just file it away and not involve HR at all and then just dump it all on HR at once to take action. If you let HR help guide you it one establishes the conduct early, and as you ramp up the pressure the employee will run to HR and if you beat them to the punch then they have already lost.

It really comes down to that most poor performers cannot get out of their own way so once you ramp up the pressure they will do something obvious to get themselves fired i.e. ignore clear direction several times, come in late, be awol, drink of the job, etc. I have seen it several times. If they turn around then its a win-win

Ramping up the pressure so people will fail sounds kinda… hostile.

I have fired several FEDS as a sup and the trick is to involve HR early...a lot of people will document however they will just file it away and not involve HR at all and then just dump it all on HR at once to take action. If you let HR help guide you it one establishes the conduct early, and as you ramp up the pressure the employee will run to HR and if you beat them to the punch then they have already lost.

It really comes down to that most poor performers cannot get out of their own way so once you ramp up the pressure they will do something obvious to get themselves fired i.e. ignore clear direction several times, come in late, be awol, drink of the job, etc. I have seen it several times. If they turn around then its a win-win

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have forced out of my agency every post-probationary, problem child I have had the misfortune to supervise. I made their professional life a living hell by enforcing against them the applicable eppes and my own professional standards.

It’s a kick in the groin when they leave for a non-sup 15, but that pain is temporary.

They’re laughing at you from the comfort of their non-supervisory 15 chairs.

Doubtful. Losers are losers, and their new manager is likely on to it by now and they are being pressured out again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm also thinking about the effects on morale in both directions. Everyone can tell she is not pulling her weight and some people probably resent that but at the same time firing someone is often bad for the morale of even the high performers.

As I high performing fed for 30 years, married to another high performing fed with almost the same amount of time in, I can guarantee that firing a poor performer will do nothing but help morale. My biggest resentment in federal government is that I am totally busting my butt but getting paid exactly the same as someone who twiddles their thumbs all day. At my agency, I have seen 3 people fired over the years - two who just stopped showing up for work and one who was stealing equipment. It still took almost a year to fire all of them Do the right thing. Good luck.

+100

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have forced out of my agency every post-probationary, problem child I have had the misfortune to supervise. I made their professional life a living hell by enforcing against them the applicable eppes and my own professional standards.

It’s a kick in the groin when they leave for a non-sup 15, but that pain is temporary.

Sounds like too many fed supervisors. No real work to do, so they go out of their way to “make their professional life a living hell…”. With all the trainings and “work” meetings required of fed supervisors, I’m surprised you don’t see how unethical this is.

To address some points, for some occupation series, a non-sup 15 is (while not common) not rare. One non-prestigious agency in particular hired dozens last fiscal year.

The only negative feedback (directly and anonymously) that I have received is a failure to deal with poor performers. I have no grievances filed against me. And my agency’s employee morale consultant has spoken with me twice because my office’s rating are so high vis-a-vis the agency as a whole.

I find it more ethical to inform my low performer that his work is substandard and not improving to enable him to find other employment in an environment better suited to his abilities. I find extremely unethical and wasteful the idea of putting such employees in a corner for 20+ years until he/she retires.

I’m a new manager working under a very severe and myopic boss. Alllllll of her time is spent persecuting a couple of low performers instead of getting them to do just a little bit more. It’s insanely wasteful. It is causing turnover with long time staff, high absenteeism, and problems among the new hires who see the red flags and are running away. All on the government dime. It’s not right. Because I am not all in with her strategy to try and fire these people, and because I try to help them do their jobs, I am on her shit list too. It’s not leading change, it’s just a waste.

The pattern is low performers either stay and do nothing or someone comes along to hold them accountable,they get fired and then they claim discrimination and then they get rehired.

Anonymous wrote:I have forced out of my agency every post-probationary, problem child I have had the misfortune to supervise. I made their professional life a living hell by enforcing against them the applicable eppes and my own professional standards.

It’s a kick in the groin when they leave for a non-sup 15, but that pain is temporary.

Sounds like too many fed supervisors. No real work to do, so they go out of their way to “make their professional life a living hell…”. With all the trainings and “work” meetings required of fed supervisors, I’m surprised you don’t see how unethical this is.

Anonymous wrote:I have forced out of my agency every post-probationary, problem child I have had the misfortune to supervise. I made their professional life a living hell by enforcing against them the applicable eppes and my own professional standards.

It’s a kick in the groin when they leave for a non-sup 15, but that pain is temporary.

They’re laughing at you from the comfort of their non-supervisory 15 chairs.