I work for a large company that has several offices and is actually owned by an English company. (Not that the ownership matters; just pointing out that it’s a rather “corporate” environment.)
In our department are the people who process the data, a department manager, a department director, and then the department president. At a meeting the other day we were informed that we were getting a new vice-president. I could tell the director was disappointed, as I have heard that he wanted the job. But other directors seem not to like him.
We were under a VP from another business unit a few years ago. “K” was a bitch to work for. She was arbitrary, contradicted herself and then denied it, and offered no support to our department. I was glad to see the back of her. Our new VP, “B”, who starts Monday, is from the same business unit as “K”. From what I’ve heard, “B” makes “K” look like a saint by comparison.
Morale in her department is (or at least was) abysmal. People didn’t know from one day to the next whether they’d have a job. Many people disliked her so much that they were trying to transfer out of her division, and other people quit. One thing I’ve heard she did (and our director confirmed this to a co-worker who brought it up) was making people interview to keep their jobs. We’re talking about good, experienced people who have been doing good jobs for years; not a bunch of idiots.
I’m not worried about my job. I’m one of the most respected people in the department. When people have a problem, they come to me. Need a special program quickly? Ask Johnny L.A. Now, I’ve just bought a new motorcycle and my '66 MGB roadster is undergoing a very expensive “ground up” restoration. It would be nice to be employed until the car is finished and the bike is paid for; but I have a “Plan B”, which is to just pay for them out of my bank account. The only reason I’m still in California is because I like my job and it pays well. And I hate California! If I were to be laid off, I would move up to Washington immediately. So for me it’s a “win-win situation”. Either I keep my job and don’t have to dip into my bank account, or I lose my job and I can move away.
But the idea of having experienced employees who are doing an excellent job (which can be shown my the metrics and the revenue) rankles. In my opinion requiring interviews to keep one’s job is a poor practice used by petty martinets who have no faith in the people they are supposed to lead. I find it incredibly insulting, and very unprofessional.
What do you think?