Hi everybody,
Firing of an employee - when I say, the employee could be an ordinary worker, a staff, a middle management staff, or even a senior management staff. Though being in HR, our views and assessment may differ from that of the Management, we are made to execute the management's decision of firing an employee.
Well friends, what do you say on this hiring and firing? Do you think this will serve the purpose? Don't you feel let down when you or through you, an employee is fired? Don't you think you had invested your time and energy in going through his credentials, speaking to him, probing him through your questions, tried to find out his credentials through your own known channels and contacts and after some time, that person is believed to have become a burden to the organization and he is fired through you because you are an HR person!
I think this is there in any organization, please correct me friends if I am wrong! Being an HR professional, is this what we are supposed to do? Can we not change this? I want you all to put on your thinking caps, come out with your views, suggestions, and comments. I want this to be a useful discussion.
-Srinaren
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
16Firing of an employee - when I say, the employee could be an ordinary worker, a staff, a middle management staff, or even a senior management staff. Though being in HR, our views and assessment may differ from that of the Management, we are made to execute the management's decision of firing an employee.
Well friends, what do you say on this hiring and firing? Do you think this will serve the purpose? Don't you feel let down when you or through you, an employee is fired? Don't you think you had invested your time and energy in going through his credentials, speaking to him, probing him through your questions, tried to find out his credentials through your own known channels and contacts and after some time, that person is believed to have become a burden to the organization and he is fired through you because you are an HR person!
I think this is there in any organization, please correct me friends if I am wrong! Being an HR professional, is this what we are supposed to do? Can we not change this? I want you all to put on your thinking caps, come out with your views, suggestions, and comments. I want this to be a useful discussion.
-Srinaren
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi!
Before an employee is hired, the company spends a lot of time and cost in acquiring the right person for the right job. In my opinion, at a personal level, I would take extra care before finalizing the right candidate. However, if after some time I find that the employee is really not suited, I would try to re-evaluate him and find out the real problem. It could vary from not having sufficient practical exposure, not being able to relate to the new job, improper induction, a bad boss, force-fitting a candidate, a poor work environment, medical issues, family issues, a case of promises/expectations not being met, etc. Depending on the real problem, I would take steps to address it (counseling, grievance handling, problem-solving, re-culturizing, re-inducting, training, etc., the employee).
Despite applying these interventions, if there is no improvement in the employee, as a last resort, the employee will have to be fired. But one must remember that union issues, if any, cannot be ignored.
Ultimately, one must remember that "One bad apple spoils the bunch." Hence, precedents must be set.
Regards,
Shyamali
From India, Nasik
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Before an employee is hired, the company spends a lot of time and cost in acquiring the right person for the right job. In my opinion, at a personal level, I would take extra care before finalizing the right candidate. However, if after some time I find that the employee is really not suited, I would try to re-evaluate him and find out the real problem. It could vary from not having sufficient practical exposure, not being able to relate to the new job, improper induction, a bad boss, force-fitting a candidate, a poor work environment, medical issues, family issues, a case of promises/expectations not being met, etc. Depending on the real problem, I would take steps to address it (counseling, grievance handling, problem-solving, re-culturizing, re-inducting, training, etc., the employee).
Despite applying these interventions, if there is no improvement in the employee, as a last resort, the employee will have to be fired. But one must remember that union issues, if any, cannot be ignored.
Ultimately, one must remember that "One bad apple spoils the bunch." Hence, precedents must be set.
Regards,
Shyamali
From India, Nasik
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Every organization is like a society. To be a member of a given society, whether you like it or not, you ought to follow their rules and regulations. Like every citizen is expected to adhere to the rules and regulations of one's country. Hence, if an organization expects an HR personnel to act as per their decision on any given issue, despite clarifying the merits of your opinion, you have to adhere to the decision of the management. Is there any other choice? But, I can safely vouch that no management would insist on firing an employee just for the heck of it.
To feel good or bad about executing an assignment is personal. To do that assignment in a good or bad manner is what matters. That is practical. Bhagavad Gita - "Do your duty" - preaches this attitude only.
There is a general feeling that HR means being only good to people. That can be a personal goal to practice in one's life. In any organization, HR is to do good for the organization. In the process, you may come across conflicting sentiments. To an organization, employees are resources to meet their objectives. Hence, the function of Human Resource Management. How well the HR department creates a culture for recruitment, training, retention, etc., is what matters to any organization. That's why your job exists in any organization.
So... don't feel bad for making a tough decision and executing it. DO IT in the right way.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
To feel good or bad about executing an assignment is personal. To do that assignment in a good or bad manner is what matters. That is practical. Bhagavad Gita - "Do your duty" - preaches this attitude only.
There is a general feeling that HR means being only good to people. That can be a personal goal to practice in one's life. In any organization, HR is to do good for the organization. In the process, you may come across conflicting sentiments. To an organization, employees are resources to meet their objectives. Hence, the function of Human Resource Management. How well the HR department creates a culture for recruitment, training, retention, etc., is what matters to any organization. That's why your job exists in any organization.
So... don't feel bad for making a tough decision and executing it. DO IT in the right way.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Srinaren,
I can understand your dilemma. However, as rightly pointed out by my friends, when it comes to the business requirements, I think personal feelings and emotions are kept aside. Truly said, no organization will just chuck out people for fun. There have to be solid reasons to do so. At times, the reasons are also not supported to take such drastic action. You will appreciate that Line Managers would not like to earn a bad reputation by chucking out people since they have to get the work done from other employees. So HR becomes the scapegoat. If I am correct, only the communication part has to be handled by HR, decisions for which are normally taken by the Line Managers. I feel, if we organize our communication process in such a way that on one end the employee more or less understands the reasons and you also do not feel the burden. If this is not so, then how are companies affecting CRS and VRS? I feel I am able to make my points clear.
Regards, K Narayan 09860428364
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I can understand your dilemma. However, as rightly pointed out by my friends, when it comes to the business requirements, I think personal feelings and emotions are kept aside. Truly said, no organization will just chuck out people for fun. There have to be solid reasons to do so. At times, the reasons are also not supported to take such drastic action. You will appreciate that Line Managers would not like to earn a bad reputation by chucking out people since they have to get the work done from other employees. So HR becomes the scapegoat. If I am correct, only the communication part has to be handled by HR, decisions for which are normally taken by the Line Managers. I feel, if we organize our communication process in such a way that on one end the employee more or less understands the reasons and you also do not feel the burden. If this is not so, then how are companies affecting CRS and VRS? I feel I am able to make my points clear.
Regards, K Narayan 09860428364
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
HR Manual (Employee Hand Book).doc
Competency-base d HR Management.ppt