I hope you realize how many people get “disappeared” all the time. Let’s start with the obvious. Any notification about an executive or manager resigning for “personal” or “family” reasons means they were canned and probably suddenly maybe even for something serious and illegal. A decent portion of management “quitting” or taking a leave of absence" was because they were forced to resign. They say that regular workers “quit” all the time when they really don’t. That is a consolation prize for the worker leaving quickly and quietly over a serious issue. It is often offered over more serious reprimands including legal action. Companies don’t like things from embezzlement, affairs, or sexual harassment to get around and yet these things happen all the time.
I have had legitimate reasons for inside employee employee information at several large companies and my eyes have almost bugged out at some of the things coming across. The strange thing is that they tend to be rather consistent from place to place. Someone should right a “Fool Employee’s Handbook” or something as a warning guide. The fact that the great majority of these things are covered up makes employees think that they have discovered something new.
I reported in from a big company, and what you say is true. Employees who everyone thought were doing a great job would “disappear”. Gradually the real story would come out and there’d be shocked looks all 'round.
The last couple of years at my big company, we had a new CEO who replaced “people” managers with “bottom line” managers. I have no doubt he was just following orders and trying to keep his job, but in doing so, he fired valuable employees, good managers who refused to abuse their subordinates. A sure way to get in good with this CEO was to make someone cry. That meant you were doing your job well.
But not always. I work next to a guy who monitors internet usage. He can watch who downloads porn and how much they download and how much bandwidth it takes. And he then saves the audit trail (including the jpegs) and informs HR. HR often doesn’t act on it. Sometimes they get a warning, sometimes not. On the other hand, if we’ve been shopping for a reason, the warning never comes, they are walked to the door.
My own sexually harrassing boss eventually “pursued other opportunities” but it was months and months after HR did an investigation and found him guilty as all get out for gross violations of sexual harrassment as well as misappropriating company assets. They didn’t even let him clean out his own desk - security did it.
I worked with one guy - at a company that fired people as routinely as they bought office supplies - who did one aggregious thing after another - from not showing up to lying to faking his test results to ignoring standards to accepting large gifts in exchange for business in violation of the ethics policy. He finally DID get fired, when he showed up with a “jail tag” - he’d been arrested for embezzeling from a previous employer and they finally figured out he was a liability. That was the oddest, since we all wondered why not showing up for three days didn’t get him fired, but other folks were regularly fired for completely idiotic reasons - like not being able to bring a crashed server back from the dead fast enough.
In my experience, its easiest to get canned from the lowest level jobs - i.e. handing out too many ketchup packets at McD’s might send the shift supervisor on some weird power trip that ends with him screaming “your fired!” And easy to get canned at high levels (though even my sexual harrassing boss left with a $3M parachute - not bad for getting fired with cause) because senior management likes to churn senior management looking for someone who will get better results. And harder to get fired at mid levels where the managers tend to be a mix of competent and passive, are too busy to spend time in the hiring process and concerned that they will get their headcount back (a bad employee is better than some executive saying "well, if he never worked you don’t need to replace him), and the red tape making canning people difficult.
The only people I can fire are sales reps in other states. I have fired for using the company credit card to pay for strippers, failure to sell, failure to check in for three weeks, and failure to follow up accounts.
The failure to sell guys were part of a layoff, but they were chosen because of their records, so I think that counts.
From what I’ve seen, the easiest way to get fired from an ambulance service is driving problems. More than 4 tickets in 2 years, numerous driving complaints, at-fault accidents in the ambulance (especially driving emergent). Misuse of controlled substances would also be a quick way to get fired, although I’ve never seen it happen. It’s actually pretty rare to see someone get fired for patient care issues once they’ve been cleared to work on their own.
If I’ve fired you in the past, it means one thing…you can’t do your job to my satifaction. You were up all night because your girlfriend/boyfriend/mother/father of your child wanted to call to bitch and moan? Sorry, you couldn’t do the job to my satisfaction. I don’t care why you couldn’t do your job, if you can’t, you’re out. I don’t expext miracles, but if you’re useless more then one day in a row, you’re outta here.
My job is to meet company expextations. If you can’t do that more then I care to defend, you’re out. Sorry, but I do my job, I expect you to do yours.
As advice to the OP, I’d say being someone the boss can trust goes a long way toward protecting your job. Needless to say, that means no lying, stealing, etc. Don’t be afraid to say you don’t know and need to find out, rather than guess or make something up. Be reliable in terms of attendance, punctuality and getting your job done. If you are trusted but not able to perform the job, the boss may move you into a different role, redefine the scope of your job, or give you a good recommendation at least. If you are good at your job but not trusted, that doesn’t count for much.
Wow, remind me not to have two bad days in a row around you. You’re the boss, you can do what you want within the bounds of the law, but damn, refusing to take into account the notion that your employees are human beings and don’t function to your specs 365 days a year is (what forum are we in again?), I’ll just say harsh.
As for me, I’ve been fired because I didn’t pretend that I enjoyed lifting 75 pound weights well enough for my manager. Someone at my current shitty job was fired for looking at his cell phone.
I think he meant that as his own guidelines for general trends with a particular employee. People love to take these things literally when it is very rarely so. Even a hard-ass boss is going to understand if you have 2 family members die in a week. It is a pattern that managers look for even if isn’t always just or fairly applied.
As for being fired for looking a cell-phone: I don’t doubt that he got “fired” for looking a a cell phone but that was most definitely not the first offense. Managers build up just or unjust desires to fire certain employees and then pick the most convenient excuse to do it. When someone is said to be fired for X that can almost always be translated into “We used X to fire this employee because we wanted to anyway”. The exceptions would generally be only egregious offenses like stealing or sexual harassment that can get you fired on the first offense.
I dunno, seemed pretty clear-cut and literal to me. But if he wouldn’t actually fire someone for being “useless” two days in a row, he is free to explain what he meant.
If you morph into more than two dozen lizards during the midday rush, you’re gone.
I once had a 3rd-shift conversation with a longtime union official. He told me there wasn’t a rule against having sex in the plant. As long as both parties were on their break times, there was no infraction. He told of one woman who would take on all comers during her lunch. They couldn’t fire her, but they talked her into finding a less public place for her adventures.
Plus, he said “useless”, not “having a bad or ‘off’ day”. There is a difference between having zero productivity, or being completely incoherent from a hangover or lack of sleep, and merely being not at one’s best.
That said, I’ll have to agree with the basic gist of his post. Too damn many people in this day and age have the attitude that a luxurious life should be handed to them on a silver platter with little or no effort on their part other than showing up once in a while.
I’m not suggesting anyone ehould get a free ride at a company’s expense (well, except for me of course, but I deserve it). But I’ve had bad days on the job where I’m sure that a hard-ass boss would classify as “useless.” Firing someone for having even two “useless” days in a row – whatever the subjective word “useless” means – would be such a deterrent to my overall employment record that a boss would be willing to dispose of me.
And too damn many people think that they don’t owe their loyal employees respect for a job well done. The difference is that when one of the former is discussed they’re usually (correctly) derided as a parasite while one of the latter is often (wrongly) lionized as a hero of business.
Sorry if I was vague; but if you work for me and you come in and don 't do your job for two days in a row, you’re out. Your Cat/Aunt Millie/ Wife died? Take time off and I’ll send you a sympathy card and mean it. But the second you step in the workplace and log-in/punch-in/sign-in, you work. You’re having A bad day and can’t get much done, I’ll be the first to buy you a beer after work and talk to you; If you don’t have a good reason, bye-bye. If you can’t work at 100% for a day or two for some reason, I understand. If you come in though, that means you can work at some level. If you don’t work much after coming in (for one day), hey, everybody has a bad day. You just come in for the pay and don’t do jack for two days in a row, you’re out. If you’re at work, you work. Period. (Please note, useless, to me, means you might as well not be there or you’re actively hindering those that are there to work.)
Does the above clarify? If not, let me know and I’ll try to explain more sufficiently
If this is a hard and fast, no exceptions under any circumstances, rule, then no, I don’t think it’s fair. Say you have a worker who’s been a productive employee for a year, then she has two days in a row you’d classify as “useless.” Is her year of useful and productive service so meaningless that two days of “uselessness” wipes it out? What if she’d been with you three years, or eleven years, or thirty years? If you believe two “useless” days against multiple years of productivity means you fire her, then you’re wrong.
I love working for guys like D.E.S.K.. It’s nice when the employee is valued for competence and productivity rather than for being the skiing or drinking buddy of the manager. I agree, if you have life problems that are going to make you useless then it’s time to take a vacation day.
Yeah, it’s pretty much a hard and fast rule; I’ve always been (at most) on the lower end of the management ladder but I’ll go to the ends of the Earth to watch your back, IF you do your job. Two days or Two Decades, if your current work will probably compromise my department’s productivity, you’re out.
I don’t always work at 100%, nor does anybody I’ve ever come in contact with. But if two days in a row result in 0% productivity, that person doesn’t need/want the job. I’ll accomidate them by releasing them and giving their job to somebody with some desire.
No offense, Otto. but I think our primary disagreement might be the definition of useless for two days in a row.
Piece - DESK
#^* Xanex. Sorry for the spelling errors, but that’s why I have little sympathy for slackers. I’m on Xanex for anxiety attacks and I’m hurting from decades of job related injuries, yet I went in every day and did my job. Those that do nothing for more then one day don’t earn my sympathy, because I’ve either come in and done my job OR taken leave to heal. Those that won’t do either earn nothing from me.
You’re not presenting a consistent definition of what you consider “useless.” You went from “come in and don’t do your job for two days in a row” to “You’re having A bad day and can’t get much done (and) you don’t have a good reason” to “you might as well not be there or you’re actively hindering those that are there to work” to “your current work will probably compromise my department’s productivity” to “two days in a row result in 0% productivity” within the space of a couple of posts. If I worked for you I wouldn’t know what to make of this sort of subjectivity.
I also think it’s foolish for a manager to go directly to termination of an otherwise competent employee on the basis of putting together two “useless” days in a row. I am baffled by the idea that a manager would throw away the investment of time and money, and incur the costs of finding and training a new employee, by terminating an employee after two “useless” days rather than, for example, mandating a suspension instead.
