This entire video was extremely sickening! I couldn’t even watch it to the end. Coming from someone that’s been on a PIP… this video screams out manipulation. PIPS is a legal entity to make sure that the “COMPANY” is legally protected before letting someone go/terminated. The condescending attitudes majority of the panel had sounds redundant and fake. Not under any circumstances does the HR care about your success if you the EMPLOYEE is struggling in your role/position. They need that PIP to legally get rid of you. Statistics show in most major companies that it’s like 97% of employees NEVER make it out of a PIP. This video is a prime example of how HR feels about you as the employee . They are primarily there to protect “Their OWN”, and if you are ever put on one…. You would be doing yourself a disservice by trying to stay. God forbid, even if you did make it out… that PIP would NEVER go away! It would always follow you no matter where or what you tried to go within the organization. Find yourself a better place of employment where you can start fresh. Because at this point, this is just a setup.. that employer is only looking out for themselves! This panel utterly disgust me. Shameful!😮
I agree with you. For the 97% of cases you mention, the employee is performing well. But now, the PIP has become an acceptable and common practice to get rid of the "black horse" employee that is typically high-skilled and highly productive, thus at odds with a team of mostly mediocre members (including the manager) and hard to terminate based on pure work performance. PIPs are also highly subjective using terms like "unprofessional" that cannot be measured. They are also used to demean and humiliate workers. I also found this in an article: "The post-boomer new generation middle managers tend to rely on tools favoring standardization in the decision-making or project delivering process. They tend to be ruthless ('relationship' means very little), and like to band together and act like a "Fraternity Group". PIP, in essence a group-decision-make tool without clear boundaries and definitions, is perfect for them to use getting rid of an otherwise hard-to-terminate high-performance employee with low risk of a lawsuit (The PIP employee is usually required to sign the PIP to show "understanding" and "commitment to the plan" thus agreeing to the 'guilt' summarized on PIP)". Corp O Rat America is being run by morons now. In my over 40 year career, I never heard of or went through any type of PIP. Not ONCE. Then in the last 4 years, I experienced 2 of them. I both cases I did not sign and never would sign the bogus subjective terms. I quite instead. At my age, which I believe is one of the reasons for them, I am not sure I ever want to work in a corp o rat culture again. Employers want to know why it's so hard to keep loyal workers, take a look at these people and HR and management and you will find the reason why.
Yesss OMG this video was so infuriating with their gaslighting and subjective narrative. I find it funny when they say "they are here to help you" but when you give constructive feedback or input like more staff or lessen work load it is a jedi bait and switch. Smh.
Listening to this just for few minutes helps me realize how much of a sham it is in my case and that the manager and the HR should be the ones to be put on PIP to help them learn of how to do a PIP.
Fat lies, they are just trying to get rid of people the “ we are here to help you” is bull crap. I personally set up meetings with the people who put me on a PIP and the one accepted the invite but didnt show up until the other manager called him. I was asked why I set it up, and I told them because I am trying to be accountable for my own actions. They dint want to be there.
I wonder if someone from HR was ever put on a PIP.. Whey they asked about the “supporting” part ,, that Naomi person , I guarantee could care less about supporting the person. They need to get the side of the associate also, not just their manger.
Just got a pip today. I don't fancy my chances and am taking my time to look for other jobs. I'll try to improve. But I'm thinking its the manager just having enough of me.
Are Naomi and Ryan on hire because they were placed on PIPs at their last jobs? How long were they at their last employers? Can we get an episode with a play-by-play of how they failed to meet their PIPs and the timeline it took to get them out the door?
Human Resources is a tough industry and recruiters are often the first to be let go in a recessionary period in advance of a hiring freeze or staff reduction. That might not be the case for them however
When an employee goes on pip, why is there no focus on the manager? Why does HR automatically take the side of the manager? It takes two. Listen to the employee and figure out what's really going on from that employee's perspective. I guarantee you that you're going to hear bad things about the manager. Then who do you believe? Better not just take the side of the manager, because that would be wrong. I've had friends who went through pips before. They said the same thing. It was all because of the manager doing the wrong things, not listening to them, not empowering employees to do what they need to do, or even gross negligence in caring for the safety of the employees. It's usually not the employee. The employee wants to do good work. They're often placed in a horrible position by management. As soon as a manager initiates the pip process against an employee, you HR should go into overdrive and begin getting both sides of the story from a neutral perspective. Let them both explain themselves. Do not just accept that managers are always right. If you're not doing that, then I have to judge you HR as being evil. You seem so nice, too, but that's the fact.
I absolutely agree with this, they automatically side with the person who is writing it, without even asking the associate what really is going on. They dont care.
HR is only interested in protecting the company. Most times, it equates to siding with management. In some cases, however, HR may side with the employee (flagrant harassment with definitive proof, for example) because to ignore or do otherwise could endanger the company with a lawsuit. And, just because HR sides with you one day, doesn't mean they won't turn on you the next. Whatever is perceived as beneficial for the company, that's the way they roll.
A PIP is the kiss of death. If you ever end up on a PIP, make sure your resume is updated and actively start looking for a new job. Any decent boss / manager would take their employee aside and discuss performance issues and not jus throw the employee on a PIP. I was put on a PIP many years ago. I was given the list of things that needed to get done with their due dates. I finished everything on the list early and was still fired. So what I learned was, if you get put on a PIP, don't even bother trying anymore, work only on improving yourself and let the company fire you and you can claim unemployment while waiting for your next job to start.
I am not in HR or management at an organization. I think there are cases were a PIP is used as a positive good tool to retain an employee. If used properly by a manager that has given past feedback and wants to use the PIP as a more robust tool to help retain an employee and correct performance issues, it is a right thing to do. I received a PIP in this context and passed the PIP but did eventually move to a different company.
Yes, there are certainly cases where PIP is implemented in good-faith with the only intention to support the employee and help get him or her back on-track. This is what a PIP should always be used for. Sadly, more often the case than not, it's used as a tool to push the unwanted employee out while covering the company legally. The decision has already been made before the PIP is ever handed out, which is wrong on so many levels as it gives the false impression that the employee is being given a fair chance.
This panel did an amazing job detailing what a PIP is, and how to properly issue them to employees. People get confused in general on what the purpose of Human Resources is, it’s to help an organization maintain its assets and rid it of liabilities. Hence, the reason why HR work so closely with in house counsel. So, PIP’s are just ways an organization maintain assets and rid itself of liabilities. As Heather pointed out, the problem occurs when HR take sides instead of actually looking at the evidence, such as “is this something we should’ve accommodated due to an ADA or FMLA issue” and so forth. Thus- HR must remain neutral and do as this panel says.
