Maybe it's weak, but I've got a reason for not writing
I have been going through some work changes over the last month and 1/2 or so. For several weeks behind my back, I had an employee wrecking my reputation with my bosses by sending continual emails detailing my supposed failings as a communicator and as a manager. Now, in a normal library environment, you would think that my superiors would give a fellow professional the benefit of the doubt and ask for my side of the story, or at least tell this paraprofessional to take up these issues (which, by all accounts except this clerk's, were trivial in nature) with his supervisor (me). Instead, all credence was given to my underling's tales of woe and fantastic disrespect and I was summarily dismissed from my position.
Lest you think this was a simple case of personality conflict (in which case I would also think a normal library management team would close ranks with someone they had invested a great deal of time/money/effort to promote in order to join the team against the wearisome complaints of a troubled employee), this same employee had gotten into serious verbal altercations with two other co-workers (one a part timer, the other another professional librarian, who was so distressed by this employee that she transferred to another location to get away from him!) within the previous 5 months. You might think this would tend to make my bosses leery of crediting this employee's point of view on any subject pertaining to his work environment, but there is a fly in that ointment. My immediate supervisor was the former manager of this employee, and had never had any problems with him--clearly his "acting out" was all my fault, right? In any case, you might think that my boss would either a) essentially recuse herself from getting involved directly for lack of proper objectivity; or b) talk to the others involved with any of these previous conflicts to see what they thought about my performance, but you'd be wrong again. Instead, I was told repeatedly that I was responsible for "correcting" my own behavior and change my methods of communicating/managing to accommodate this employee's peculiarities. When I complained to my third level supervisor (my boss's boss's boss), with whom I had heretofore had a good working relationship and a clear line of communication, that I was feeling unsupported I was told I was wrong, even though she agreed with my assessment of this employee and thought well of my abilities.
My dismissal meeting was a treat. My three bosses gathered together to tell me the news across a conference table, and they then began to attempt to soften the blow by extolling my virtues. The problem with doing that, of course, is that it is totally irrelevant to the purpose of the meeting. Why on earth would you want to tell the person you are (in essence) firing how much you think of him/her, unless it is to make yourself feel better about destroying that person's career? It certainly came across as rather cruel, especially since the compliments were of the backhanded nature. At the same time they were telling me that I had "failed" and that I didn't have the "special skills" to succeed as a manager, they tried to appear fair-minded by also telling me how they respected and valued me. (To square that circle, they appended the phrase "as a reference librarian" to every compliment to ensure that I would feel my now-reduced status. For example, after telling me I had "failed to properly anticipate and solve problems" [a rather damning assessment], they told me I was a terrific asset to the library as a reference librarian, making darn sure I heard every implied "only" or "just".)
The problem was that none of this had to be done at all. I was still under probation, meaning that they didn't need to provide either Human Resources or me a reason to fail me and send me back to my former position, and therefore didn't need to tell me any of those things. They could have simply told me "it wasn't working out" or that they were doing it "for my own benefit" because I was unhappy, and I would have been relatively OK with it, because both of those had the added value of being true. Telling me I was a failure was a simply and unnecessarily mean spirited move. The best part of the meeting, though, was when we got to the actual procedure for my dismissal. I could have forced them to go through the onerous process of formally rejecting my probation (which would then "go on my permanent record"), or I could have "voluntarily" resigned my position. Seeing no long-term benefit to the former, I chose the latter course of action, without realizing that I would then be asked to hand write my resignation then and there, as I sat across from them at that table in the conference room! As if my humiliation wasn't complete enough, right?
So I am now at a crossroads: do I stay in this position knowing I will never advance in this organization, or do I light out for new territories and suffer the traumas of interviewing and the assured pay cut of a new job in the hopes of advancing there?
Lest you think this was a simple case of personality conflict (in which case I would also think a normal library management team would close ranks with someone they had invested a great deal of time/money/effort to promote in order to join the team against the wearisome complaints of a troubled employee), this same employee had gotten into serious verbal altercations with two other co-workers (one a part timer, the other another professional librarian, who was so distressed by this employee that she transferred to another location to get away from him!) within the previous 5 months. You might think this would tend to make my bosses leery of crediting this employee's point of view on any subject pertaining to his work environment, but there is a fly in that ointment. My immediate supervisor was the former manager of this employee, and had never had any problems with him--clearly his "acting out" was all my fault, right? In any case, you might think that my boss would either a) essentially recuse herself from getting involved directly for lack of proper objectivity; or b) talk to the others involved with any of these previous conflicts to see what they thought about my performance, but you'd be wrong again. Instead, I was told repeatedly that I was responsible for "correcting" my own behavior and change my methods of communicating/managing to accommodate this employee's peculiarities. When I complained to my third level supervisor (my boss's boss's boss), with whom I had heretofore had a good working relationship and a clear line of communication, that I was feeling unsupported I was told I was wrong, even though she agreed with my assessment of this employee and thought well of my abilities.
My dismissal meeting was a treat. My three bosses gathered together to tell me the news across a conference table, and they then began to attempt to soften the blow by extolling my virtues. The problem with doing that, of course, is that it is totally irrelevant to the purpose of the meeting. Why on earth would you want to tell the person you are (in essence) firing how much you think of him/her, unless it is to make yourself feel better about destroying that person's career? It certainly came across as rather cruel, especially since the compliments were of the backhanded nature. At the same time they were telling me that I had "failed" and that I didn't have the "special skills" to succeed as a manager, they tried to appear fair-minded by also telling me how they respected and valued me. (To square that circle, they appended the phrase "as a reference librarian" to every compliment to ensure that I would feel my now-reduced status. For example, after telling me I had "failed to properly anticipate and solve problems" [a rather damning assessment], they told me I was a terrific asset to the library as a reference librarian, making darn sure I heard every implied "only" or "just".)
The problem was that none of this had to be done at all. I was still under probation, meaning that they didn't need to provide either Human Resources or me a reason to fail me and send me back to my former position, and therefore didn't need to tell me any of those things. They could have simply told me "it wasn't working out" or that they were doing it "for my own benefit" because I was unhappy, and I would have been relatively OK with it, because both of those had the added value of being true. Telling me I was a failure was a simply and unnecessarily mean spirited move. The best part of the meeting, though, was when we got to the actual procedure for my dismissal. I could have forced them to go through the onerous process of formally rejecting my probation (which would then "go on my permanent record"), or I could have "voluntarily" resigned my position. Seeing no long-term benefit to the former, I chose the latter course of action, without realizing that I would then be asked to hand write my resignation then and there, as I sat across from them at that table in the conference room! As if my humiliation wasn't complete enough, right?
So I am now at a crossroads: do I stay in this position knowing I will never advance in this organization, or do I light out for new territories and suffer the traumas of interviewing and the assured pay cut of a new job in the hopes of advancing there?
posted by bryduck at 7:43 AM
3 Comments:
Without a doubt, move on. From your rant it sounds like you've done all you can where you are now. Move on. There's a good chance you'll meet people who respect you and value you as an employee at a new place. Find room for advancement. Move on, no doubt about it.
It's always easier to find work while you're working. If it were me, I would keep the job I had, tidy up my resume and "go through the trauma" of interviewing while still drawing a paycheck.
Don't assume that any new position out there will be a pay cut; what is true is that you may have to consider re-location, which is never fun.
As far as your dismissal meeting, one reason one extols the person's virtues is to show them their strengths, which may be better suited for another gig. Consider that a gift of the situation, where you can use your virtues and strengths, of which you have many, to find a gig that suits you better.
I've known you long enough to know you have many talents; don't get so caught up in this that you fail to recognize in yourself all of your strengths and talents.
Remember, "this too shall pass."
Hope that helps...
Take the advice of the previous comments - they're good notes. And quit beating yourself up over this. Yes, it was a crappy play but, it's over. Look at it this way: at least you don't have to work with that underling any more! The next manager will have problems with him/her, too!
Post a Comment
<< Home