What would you do? Employee narrowly survives layoff, complains about transfer
May 4, 2009 by Sam NarisiPosted in: In This Week's E-Newsletter, Latest News & Views, Retention
Dealing with the fallout of a layoff or restructuring is one of HR’s toughest jobs. Imagine this scenario:
A company needs to cut staff, but is able to get by with minimal layoffs — however, the plan also requires many employees to be moved around among different departments.
One employee in particular is spared from the chopping block, but must be transferred to a different department than he’s used to, for a job with less prestige than his previous position.
And instead of being grateful for his continued employment, he won’t stop complaining about his new role. He still completes all his tasks, but only satisfactorily, and his toxic attitude is killing morale.
His manager comes to HR for advice. We recently asked three HR managers how they would respond:
Response #1: I’d have to personally sit down with the employee and explain that we’re all in a tight spot right now and need to work together to get through it. I’d also get specific examples of his bad behavior from the manager to help me outline any changes he needs to make.
Response #2: The key would be making sure the employee understands why the change was necessary. He was obviously a good enough worker that we decided we had to keep him, so its possible there’s some failure in communication that led him to believe he was being demoted or that he isn’t valued. I’d sit down with him to set the record straight.
Response #3: Sounds like the employee needs to be warned about his actions — and fired if the behavior continues. Morale is probably bad enough as it is without a constant complainer, so we’d need to stop the problem before it gets any worse.
What about you? If you were in this situation, how would you handle it? Give us your opinion in the comments section below.
Tags: Economy, layoffs, morale, survivor, transfer, What would you do?
May 8th, 2009 at 10:08 am
I agree with both Response #1 and Response #2, but I would take them in reverse order. After stroking him by telling him the value we place on him and his work, and discussing the situation to determine if there has been any miscommunication, I would give him the correct information (as outlined by the company), tell him of the specific examples of bad behavior on his part and the adjustment he would be expected to make going forward.
May 8th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
I would have a face to face with the employee and reference as much company handbook and professional/leadership material to support the need for a more positive outlook. If the employee still fails to recognize that their whining is detrimental to the group, my final attempt would go like this:
I can understand that you may not be as challenged or feel as rewarded in your new role but the company felt you had skills and abilities that were beneficial to the group. Your skills combined with everyone’s input would help our group survive this downturn. This is what warranted keeping you on when others were let go. Please understand that during this period there are many employees that have had changes in work loads and have accepted additional responsibilities to help us transition through this. It is imperative that we ALL keep an optimistic outlook so we can emerge from this successfully. There will be future opportunities and growth available after we weather this storm but your current attitude and behaviors are making the group question if keeping you on was the right decision. You were given an opportinuties to make the best of this situation and help the team work together. If you cannot do that then I accept your resignation.
May 11th, 2009 at 11:02 am
Very nicely written Patrick. Mind if I paraphrase from you sometime?
May 11th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
I agree with Janie. If you start the meeting with negative comments you will loose the employee because she/he will think “I am being let go”. By the time they figure out that is not the case the meeting is over. Start out stating the reason for the lay off, why he was kept during the lay off, and how his performance effects the continuance of the company and the outcome if he continues to be disrupttive.
June 26th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
I agree with communicating as much of the rationale for the changes to the employee as possible and keeping all of those comments positive. As mentioned he was likely good enough to keep in the 1st place so taking some time to salvage the situation is appropriate. I also would not assume that his demeanor is 100% the result of the change in job duties. The article mentions “prestige”. He may simply be trying to save face because he believes that his co-workers now perceive him differently. If they are available, it would be good to give him some things that would bolster his confidence and raise that self esteem.
That said, if all efforts fail I look to make the best of the situation by offering him a layoff package and recall one of teh people who lost their job to take his place. This would still be a very positive result.