90 day prob period w/out written eval?

sohappytobe

Our company policy used to do written evals after a 90 day probationary period, however, they no longer want to deal with the paperwork involved. They now want to continue the 90-day probationary period without having a 90 written evaluation - they only want written annual evals. They plan to do 90-day written evals only on those employees with whom they are dissatisfied, but not with those employees who have successfully completed the 90 period. Would that fly? Or is that discriminatory? It's my gut feeling that nothing good could come from this type of procedure.
Tx,
Tina

ray a

We do 30/60/90 day written evals on new employees. They are a 1 page condensed version of the annual review. No law that I know of dictates written evals. The bigger problem I see is not communicating with new hires on how they are progressing. At the 90 day point, you decide they don't measure up and decide to terminate. They act shocked and hurt because they didn't realize there were problems and why weren't they told. Or, when there review comes up a year later and it isn't very good, but not bad enough to terminate. Again, the ee is surprised. If your managers are communicating verbally to the ee's coaching and informing them of progress, then technically a piece of paper is not necessary. But, if they don't want to take the time to write it out, they probably won't talk to the ee's either. Setting them up for failure.

sohappytobe

Thank you Ray. You're right in that these employers do not communicate with their employees in writing nor otherwise. It's the poorest operation I've ever encountered and although I completely disagree with the work ethics around her, I need to try to keep them out of "hot water" if and when they allow me to. Do you not think that this lack of communication (veral or written) is a recipe for trouble?

ray a

Yes. I had to counsel an ee today who couldn't understand why she couldn't be promoted from a Jr Assoc to an Assoc and also receive a much larger raise than she did. Her supervisor really didn't do a very good job evaluating her and communicating exactly where she stood. So, I became the bad guy when I explained how the process works. Of course I send ee's like that back to their supervisors for more details on what they must do to improve themselves. This happens with way too much frequency. It's a learning process for all of us. The problem is you end up with an ee who may be doing a pretty fair job and capable of more, but becomes disillusioned and bitter and they can sink.

Pork

RAY: YOU ARE SO RIGHT! When I became a HOG PERSON I had to clean-up alot of manure and concerns around here. Evaluations and pay raises were two of the stinkest systems all out of wack. The issues stem directly from the top and if you don't get the top on board you'll be shovelling manure forever. I got the GM to jump on board the first year; he did what I preached! The 2nd year he became lazy and no manager got a review and I had a struggle with them to get the process done. The 3rd year it was a giant task; it was bigger than what I wanted to tackle and now I just make sure there is a payroll status change form and some apparent evaluation attached before I will process the status change. The manager supervisor has to answer the questions of why. The evaluations can be in the form of a notebook paper with words or a printed eval form.

I guess I've gotten to ole to fight these young managers to do the right thing; and they wonder why the labor pool doesn't care. It is a direct correlation to the care of the managers and how well they bring the ee into the fold.

PORK

Don D

I don't think that it's necessarily illegally 'discriminatory'. But, in a broad sense, it is legally discriminatory in that you are selecting those who you might evaluate based on some discriminating factor, their performance. But, I think this is going to assist you in wading out into some deep waters. Let's assume one of the people you select to evaluate and terminate during your 'try out' period files a charge with the EEOC in Louisiana. One of the things the EEOC will require you to do is produce the results of evaluations of others who are or were in that same type of 'try out' period during that time period and probably covering some six or 12 months back. You won't be able to do that. Then you will be called upon to show the EEOC just how it was that the company made a decision to single out this person or these few people for a written performance review when others, similarly situated, were not evaluated formally and were allowed to progress on into a rather permanent or regular employment status. You won't be able to do that. That will sink your ship.

mwild31

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 10-31-03 AT 05:31PM (CST)[/font][p]There's nothing in the laws (in my experience) that say you have to do evaluations - verbal or written - unless it's in your company handbook. If it is - make sure to change the handbook (if you eliminate the 90 day eval) and give notice to the employees concerning the change. When I make a change, I give 2 months notice.

"They plan to do 90-day written evals only on those employees with whom they are dissatisfied, but not with those employees who have successfully completed the 90 period." If you find a majority of women, people over 40, people of differing origin, etc. wind up in the "employees with whom they are dissatisfied" category - yep, it's discriminatory. Otherwise, if you get a good mix of folks in the category, it's not - the employees just aren't working out.

My fear from your post is that there may be a lack of trust between these supervisors and HR - are there concerns about discrimination from other conversations you've had with them? Do they do a poor job of documentation? Do they seem to have 'favorites'? If any of this is true - you need to meet with the supervisors & spell out your concerns with moving to this new policy & see if you all can get into agreement.

Finally, 90-day evals are a pain the behind, but if it's the only time you tell the employee how they are doing & how you are rating their performance - you better not get rid of it. "Surprises" showing up in the annual review cost a lot in lost productivity (Employee upset, employee talks to co-workers, co-workers talk to others, HR involvement sorting the mess out, meeting with supervisor to find out why, resolution meeting, etc. = $$$$). Maybe if you spell out the costs, these supervisors would understand your reluctance with the proposal. Good luck.

Ah - I just read Don's post - very good advice there!

sohappytobe

Thank you all for your insight. The fact of the matter is that I am the first HR Director this company has ever had and those in authority are completely in the dark regarding employment law, enforcing P & P's, labor law, ADA and EEOC etc. The company could currently be sued for a number of violations including sexual harrassment, discrimination, reverse discrimination, payroll practices and the list goes on. Legitimate complaints have been made to me but are dismissed when I present them to my superiors. They are just extremely fortunate that no one has yet made a trip to an attorney's office since the entire staff is extremely frustrated. When I present what I perceive to be blatant violations, I am dismissed as being too "legal" and I need to relax. Nonetheless, I appreciate your input and good wishes. You have certainly confirmed my suspicions.

Don D

I too urge you to 'relax'. Relax at your home computer, perhaps with a tall glass of iced tea or a beverage of your choice beside you, and update that resume again. Attitudes like your management has, will not mesh well with your desire to be a fully-functioning HR Director/Manager. You two will forever conflict and guess who will prevail? Keep good records of your recommendations. Don't let this become pin the tail on the donkey. Then leave when you can.

sohappytobe

Don D ... thank you kindly : ) I've been contemplating that very same notion ... sometimes a peson just needs permission (strange, huh): )... Enjoying my iced tea as I type.

blw

One other thought to help you sell the issues to senior management is to present in their terms. You can mention legal issues, but focus on increased productivity, reduced cost per hire, etc. Explain to them how the 90-day increase can improve and promote employees coming up to full production speed quicker. Speak in their language - $$$.

mwild31

Hi sohappytobe - It is as I feared - there are issues you're concerned about within the company. As to the 90-day eval - keep it in place. Tell your company that you networked the issue (the forum) with other HR professionals & they strongly advised the company not to get rid of the 90-day eval. Next, look at the 90-day eval process & see what steps are involved - streamline what you can. Then, calculate how much the 90-day evals cost the company (given to all new hires - what do you forcast - about 20 a year - more?) and then compare it to stories of companies in your state that screwed up in these areas & it cost them BIG(you can find them right here with your state's law letter) and develop a compare and contrast statement.

Finally, if you are getting dismissed as just 'legal' and told to 'relax' then you should have a meeting with your boss/CEO to find out why the company thought it was necessary to have HR in the first place. Don't whine or cry or act outraged - just ask why they thought it was important. Prepare yourself for three responses - administrative function, real HR, and smoke. I say smoke because they may not even have a clue why they need HR - they just thought it would be 'cool' to have a HR department (in small companies - this can happen). Prepare your case for each response. In HR we can tend to get preachy & long winded - make sure you make your case with no more than 10 bullet statements for each. This is tricky - but it will also help you to define how you see HR operating in the company as well. One other tip: to bring home the importance of HR - sometimes you have to bring in some outside help. Contact your insurance broker, eap rep, 401(k) rep or anyone else you can find that can come in and scare these folks into action (the ones I mentioned usually do it for free (well there is that commission rate). Sometimes going outside for this assistance (I always prep my outside rep's before they come in x;-)) can go a long way. Good luck.

sohappytobe

mwild ... thank you for your insight. It's wonderful to get such great feedback and I appreciate your experience. Gonna give it a go and keep sipping my tea : ).