Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, curious how long you've been in the position? If you are new, is there a chance that you are the problem? I'm asking because this is currently happening to me. I have never had performance issues and consistently receive high ratings/cash awards, etc. Yet I have a new boss, and we don't mix well.

She talks too much, gives confusing guidance, and constantly moves the goalpost. It's only been two months, and I am looking elsewhere. If you are new, give it time, the employee likely dislikes you too and is looking to leap.

I really appreciate this perspective and I am in fact relatively new, so I do want to be attuned to this possibility. The reason I am doubtful is that the previous branch chief (who had been there a long time) told me candidly that they did not think this person could do the job but it wasn't worth it to them to do anything about it. I also tried to be very mindful of not letting that bias me too much in my judgement, but I gave the problem-employee several assignments and virtually every single figure/table/number in each report was wrong. I gave her repeated feedback, and she was very apologetic, admitted fault, tried to fix it, and sent back another draft full of equally wrong information.

I feel bad for her because she is clearly not being malicious, willfully lazy, or unethical. She is just unable to do the job in any capacity anymore.

Some context, as I alluded to earlier, is that she is older and statistically speaking likely to retire soon so I imagine waiting her out for a natural retirement would only take a few years.

You should be frustrated with the previous branch chief for identifying but not fixing the problem. Why can he keep his job when he admittedly didn't do it and knowingly gave bs stats from the reports she provided? Yet the employee should be fired even though she was inadequately managed? This is backward and hasty thinking, considering the employee is now having to unlearn the incorrect way that she was doing the reports.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, curious how long you've been in the position? If you are new, is there a chance that you are the problem? I'm asking because this is currently happening to me. I have never had performance issues and consistently receive high ratings/cash awards, etc. Yet I have a new boss, and we don't mix well.

She talks too much, gives confusing guidance, and constantly moves the goalpost. It's only been two months, and I am looking elsewhere. If you are new, give it time, the employee likely dislikes you too and is looking to leap.

I really appreciate this perspective and I am in fact relatively new, so I do want to be attuned to this possibility. The reason I am doubtful is that the previous branch chief (who had been there a long time) told me candidly that they did not think this person could do the job but it wasn't worth it to them to do anything about it. I also tried to be very mindful of not letting that bias me too much in my judgement, but I gave the problem-employee several assignments and virtually every single figure/table/number in each report was wrong. I gave her repeated feedback, and she was very apologetic, admitted fault, tried to fix it, and sent back another draft full of equally wrong information.

I feel bad for her because she is clearly not being malicious, willfully lazy, or unethical. She is just unable to do the job in any capacity anymore.

Some context, as I alluded to earlier, is that she is older and statistically speaking likely to retire soon so I imagine waiting her out for a natural retirement would only take a few years.

Anonymous wrote:Does it matter if the person is a part of the bargaining unit? Is it easier to undertake if they’re not? I would think so, but I have not heard of that happening.

All I see is the manager starts documenting, employee sees what’s happening and jumps to another federal job.

Anonymous wrote:Op, curious how long you've been in the position? If you are new, is there a chance that you are the problem? I'm asking because this is currently happening to me. I have never had performance issues and consistently receive high ratings/cash awards, etc. Yet I have a new boss, and we don't mix well.

She talks too much, gives confusing guidance, and constantly moves the goalpost. It's only been two months, and I am looking elsewhere. If you are new, give it time, the employee likely dislikes you too and is looking to leap.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having spent my entire career in the private sector what goes on with feds would drive me nuts. If we have a poor performer we document it in their performance review, write up and agree to an action plan and if they fail to meet those objectives they know they are on the way out. For many, having to agree to an action plan is a clear message that they should look on the outside. A bad performer on a team can wreck the team and you do them a favor by getting rid of a problem. So sad that taxpayer money is being wasted on incompetent people and that management can't get rid of them.

I’m a federal manager and I agree with you. I have an MBA and try to keep up with best practices in management but it is extremely hard to work within the federal employee personnel system when we have a poor performer who needs to be removed. I find myself spending more time coaching and documenting the bad performance of this one loser than I spend with my other dozen employees who are doing well. It is maddening.

Anonymous wrote:Having spent my entire career in the private sector what goes on with feds would drive me nuts. If we have a poor performer we document it in their performance review, write up and agree to an action plan and if they fail to meet those objectives they know they are on the way out. For many, having to agree to an action plan is a clear message that they should look on the outside. A bad performer on a team can wreck the team and you do them a favor by getting rid of a problem. So sad that taxpayer money is being wasted on incompetent people and that management can't get rid of them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband did this with 2 employees one had multiple issues of grooming and sexually harrasing women besides not showing up to work over 3 years before they finally got him fired.

The other transferred to a different job thankfully before firing.

...and the obligatory MY-HUSBAND-has-experienced-this-so-let-me-act-like-I-know-everything-about-this poster has entered the chat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Congratulations! You are on the express train to hell. No waiting at the gate. You are VIP. You get on and go all the way with no stops. Satan is waiting to greet you…

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Anonymous wrote:Having spent my entire career in the private sector what goes on with feds would drive me nuts. If we have a poor performer we document it in their performance review, write up and agree to an action plan and if they fail to meet those objectives they know they are on the way out. For many, having to agree to an action plan is a clear message that they should look on the outside. A bad performer on a team can wreck the team and you do them a favor by getting rid of a problem. So sad that taxpayer money is being wasted on incompetent people and that management can't get rid of them.