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.
That's what it takes to be at the top, you have to be really cleaver about how you screw people.
The people at the top are extremely smart.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnff
I've seen, and even been on the "set up to fail" team before. It doesn't make sense because it's driven by petty jealousy and political infighting among the higher ups. The way I've seen it happen is the Super Big Boss wants to do project X. Junior Big Boss doesn't want to do X, he wants to do Y, but doesn't have the political clout to argue with the Super Big Boss.
So Junior Big Boss will set up the project, assign people to it, sometimes even normal top performers so it looks like he's really trying to do what Super Big Boss wants. But he skimps on the funding. Withholds training. In general sets the team up to fail so that when the project fails, he can say he did the best, even put his best people on it, but the project just wasn't executable.
And he does it all in such a way that when all is said and done, his position has moved up and Super Big Boss has moved down. You're just collateral damage.
So you knew that she was involved in gross incompetence so you were not really in the dark, that should have made you feel a little better.
Most of the staff did not know, at the time, the error that she made. Once people start talking, then people find out. The bosses never addressed the issue directly. Every single person makes mistakes, which are always documented, so you don't really know what is deemed "a big mistake" vs. an "acceptable" one. Management has also been constantly changing and one person differs quite a bit from another in how they handle things.
We expected there to be a little more to it because we are a heavily unionized place but there wasn't.
Oh yea that is scary, I would think as a union you would have to worry less. If the mistake was not major (ie almost getting someone hurt or killed) then I would say you have a weak union. People make mistakes and the more complex the job is the more mistakes, if all a manager is doing is documenting minor errors then everyone there should be looking for a new job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by city living
Most of the staff did not know, at the time, the error that she made. Once people start talking, then people find out. The bosses never addressed the issue directly. Every single person makes mistakes, which are always documented, so you don't really know what is deemed "a big mistake" vs. an "acceptable" one. Management has also been constantly changing and one person differs quite a bit from another in how they handle things.
We expected there to be a little more to it because we are a heavily unionized place but there wasn't.
In my past work people did get spooked a bit when someone was fired or let go.
But throughout my career, anyone that was axed, there was a good reason they were let go. Either due to incompetence or being crappy worker, or some egregious error.
It's very common for remaining employees to get nervous when one of their colleagues is let go, particularly if there does not seem to be an apparent reason as to why the employee was terminated. I'm (unfortunately) intimately involved in the process of letting employees go due to my position in HR and often after we have let someone go, their co-workers will cautiously come into my office and try to find out why we let the person go. Of course we can't disclose that, but they always look nervous and concerned when they come in asking. I've been in their place before--never went to HR to ask, but nervous when a co-worker was fired.
It's a little easier to understand and less anxiety inducing when you have some understanding of what might have led to them being asked to leave the company. If you know they had bad attendance, or maybe they were not performing well in their job, maybe there was a big blowout with their direct supervisor right before they were gone--then at least there seems to be some reason they were let go that can be tied to it.
A good percentage of terminations are due to "fit" issues. I don't know what the exact percentage is; I doubt there is even a study on this, but I imagine it is probably over 50%. These are the terminations that would fall under "political reasons" such as personality clashes with the boss, the boss simply does not like you, the boss is intimidated by you...well, you get the general idea here. These are the most troubling for the remaining employees since they are often pretty sudden and the person who was let go often did not have any apparent deficits in his or her work performance. It's also anxiety inducing since the natural conclusion is that if it could happen once, it could happen again. These kind of terminations set up a toxic work environment because then everyone starts to fear for their job and a lack of trust can set in.
It's very common for remaining employees to get nervous when one of their colleagues is let go, particularly if there does not seem to be an apparent reason as to why the employee was terminated. I'm (unfortunately) intimately involved in the process of letting employees go due to my position in HR and often after we have let someone go, their co-workers will cautiously come into my office and try to find out why we let the person go. Of course we can't disclose that, but they always look nervous and concerned when they come in asking. I've been in their place before--never went to HR to ask, but nervous when a co-worker was fired.
It's a little easier to understand and less anxiety inducing when you have some understanding of what might have led to them being asked to leave the company. If you know they had bad attendance, or maybe they were not performing well in their job, maybe there was a big blowout with their direct supervisor right before they were gone--then at least there seems to be some reason they were let go that can be tied to it.
A good percentage of terminations are due to "fit" issues. I don't know what the exact percentage is; I doubt there is even a study on this, but I imagine it is probably over 50%. These are the terminations that would fall under "political reasons" such as personality clashes with the boss, the boss simply does not like you, the boss is intimidated by you...well, you get the general idea here. These are the most troubling for the remaining employees since they are often pretty sudden and the person who was let go often did not have any apparent deficits in his or her work performance. It's also anxiety inducing since the natural conclusion is that if it could happen once, it could happen again. These kind of terminations set up a toxic work environment because then everyone starts to fear for their job and a lack of trust can set in.
I had another anxiety attack today when there was a "management only meeting" and was surprised when the head boss mentioned anyone is free to come to the conference room and get cake. lol
So apparently it wasn't as serious as I thought
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.
