Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have two friends going through this. One has already been forced by undue influence to sign a resignation. I have another friend that had been working as supervisor for over a decade and she was recently demoted to a much lower position and was removed from her place of work and put into another department in another building. She said that management said they were cutting all the supervisor positions but would get her a spot instead of a lay-off. What I noticed is that somebody replaced her as supervisor. I assume they lied to her. The sad thing is she said that the people are now harassing her in the new area she is in and she is finding it impossible to work. It is probably going to lead to a firing or a resignation. I did some research and it sounds like what she is going through is called constructive discharge. Does anybody have any experiences with this. Why exactly do managers do this? How do managers get everyone to get involved with the constructive discharge? Anyone have insider info? What can I do to help both of my friends?
They do it because it is cheaper. No need to accumulate documents over a long period of time to demonstrate justifiable firing. No severance package to pay out. No higher taxes to pay to the state for laying someone off. No damage to their reputation or company morale.
How do they get other employees to participate? Usually they don't actually do or say anything, they just let other employees pick up on tension or disagreements or dislike. Other employees want to make their bosses happy so they can keep their jobs, so they emulate what management is doing. If employees suspect a layoff is on the horizon, some will do what they can to sabotoge someone else's job in the hopes that it will save theirs.
How you can help is urge your friends to document everything. If an email has a snide tone it or a criticism, she should forward it ASAP to a personal email account for possible future use. Likewise if an email has a compliment or underlines her competency at her job, she should email that home as well. (Confidentiality policies or statements do not apply for such uses; employment laws allow an employee to keep such records as evidence for an appeal for unemployment benefits or in a legal case.). If there are other records she can keep--a handwritten log of conversations etc.
And encourage her to be proactive. She needs to get her resume out there and start looking for another job. It is really tough in this market, but it is possible. Telling a potential employer in an interview that you were already looking at the time the firing happened doesn't always help, but many employers recognize this as a sign that there were problems bigger than an individuals performance and will be less critical of such an applicant.
Constructive discharge? What a phrase.
In human services/healthcare, it's called "torturing someone with the death of a thousand petty cuts until they lose their minds and/or quit." I believe it's a corporate culture in the field.
Sorry for your friends' situations. It's crazy-making, in addition to worries about job and money.
Constructive discharge? What a phrase.
In human services/healthcare, it's called "torturing someone with the death of a thousand petty cuts until they lose their minds and/or quit." I believe it's a corporate culture in the field.
Sorry for your friends' situations. It's crazy-making, in addition to worries about job and money.
It happened to me a little over seven years ago, and then again since that time. I always wondered if there was a term for it and thanks to the OP, now I know. kodaka offered some really good advice.
I've seen it done to employees who weren't really bad enough to build a case to terminate them with cause, but weren't pulling their weight, either. Slowly they were given less responsibility and even less hours in the hopes that they would take the hint and find another job on their own.
Sometimes there are two sides to the story, and it's not always about saving the company money.
I have seen it as well. In fact, I know someone it is happening to presently-- and honestly as annerk has called it-- "managing out" is not as nefarious as it seems. As Annerk said there are two sides to every story. I am not saying that the OP's friends are not being treated unfairly, but sometimes as the company grows, matures, or the job changes and requires new skills does not mean that everyone is still the appropriate fit.
The person I know who it is happening to happened to get a promotion and a new job based on the job he held previously. The company did a lift and shift into these new roles based on the requirements of the business and what was needed. The job function basically expanded into a higher level job. The man was fortunate that he was in a job at the time that had many like him-- and so his mediocre (this is being nice) contributions were easily hidden. Now he is in a group where there are only four and he is not able to pull his weight. He has the most tenure and honestly knows the least amount out of the other workers. Ultimately it comes down to that he knows how to transact and do basically data entry level work, but he has no clue how to problem solve, analyze a situation, or think out of the box. His "work" creates A LOT of rework for the entire team, his management, his product managers, etc because he provides inaccurate information and no one can really trust what he says. I have worked with him indirectly for the past 3 years, and the same caliber of work has caused me to have to do a significant amount of rework. I have provided my feedback to his project managers/ managers at the end of the project terms. I know someone who is his supervisor and he spends most of his day trying to walk the employee through the work--- obviously this is not effective nor efficient. Meanwhile the guy does the very basic and easiest level work whereas the rest of the team has to pick up the remaining pieces.
So now-- his management must have noticed must finally have gotten wise to the situation and he is being managed out. I have heard him griping that his role is being changed to a more junior type role-- he thinks it is unfair whereas honestly it is probably the best thing for everyone else because of the quality of the guy's work. In the end, either the guy is going to quit or stay doing a job that is more appropriate for his skills.
Isn't that why you fire someone? If they are not "pulling their weight", you warn and then fire if no improvement is made. Why is harassing the person out, okay?
Quote:
Originally Posted by annerk
Anotehr term for it is "managing out."
I've seen it done to employees who weren't really bad enough to build a case to terminate them with cause, but weren't pulling their weight, either. Slowly they were given less responsibility and even less hours in the hopes that they would take the hint and find another job on their own.
Sometimes there are two sides to the story, and it's not always about saving the company money.
Why don't they do training or continuing education on the employee? I'm confused by the extremism. Lets just harass and shun the person until they leave sounds a little crazy to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovetheduns
I have seen it as well. In fact, I know someone it is happening to presently-- and honestly as annerk has called it-- "managing out" is not as nefarious as it seems. As Annerk said there are two sides to every story. I am not saying that the OP's friends are not being treated unfairly, but sometimes as the company grows, matures, or the job changes and requires new skills does not mean that everyone is still the appropriate fit.
The person I know who it is happening to happened to get a promotion and a new job based on the job he held previously. The company did a lift and shift into these new roles based on the requirements of the business and what was needed. The job function basically expanded into a higher level job. The man was fortunate that he was in a job at the time that had many like him-- and so his mediocre (this is being nice) contributions were easily hidden. Now he is in a group where there are only four and he is not able to pull his weight. He has the most tenure and honestly knows the least amount out of the other workers. Ultimately it comes down to that he knows how to transact and do basically data entry level work, but he has no clue how to problem solve, analyze a situation, or think out of the box. His "work" creates A LOT of rework for the entire team, his management, his product managers, etc because he provides inaccurate information and no one can really trust what he says. I have worked with him indirectly for the past 3 years, and the same caliber of work has caused me to have to do a significant amount of rework. I have provided my feedback to his project managers/ managers at the end of the project terms. I know someone who is his supervisor and he spends most of his day trying to walk the employee through the work--- obviously this is not effective nor efficient. Meanwhile the guy does the very basic and easiest level work whereas the rest of the team has to pick up the remaining pieces.
So now-- his management must have noticed must finally have gotten wise to the situation and he is being managed out. I have heard him griping that his role is being changed to a more junior type role-- he thinks it is unfair whereas honestly it is probably the best thing for everyone else because of the quality of the guy's work. In the end, either the guy is going to quit or stay doing a job that is more appropriate for his skills.
Isn't that why you fire someone? If they are not "pulling their weight", you warn and then fire if no improvement is made.
Sometimes they are on that cusp where you can't quite write a performance plan, but they aren't up to snuff either. "Managing Out" makes them want to seek other employment on their own, allowing them to save face and not have an actual termination on their job record.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The sad thing is she said that the people are now harassing her in the new area she is in and she is finding it impossible to work. It is probably going to lead to a firing or a resignation. I did some research and it sounds like what she is going through is called constructive discharge. Does anybody have any experiences with this. Why exactly do managers do this? How do managers get everyone to get involved with the constructive discharge? Anyone have insider info? What can I do to help both of my friends?
