No more Brasilias at SkyWest...

[Lee D]

When I was a snot nosed college kid all we had was AOL, Prodigy, and local BBSs... And we had to tie up the phone line to log on! Uphill both ways.

My eight year old told me yesterday that Skype was OLD and now everyone uses Facetime. I was like, "hey when I was a kid the only one who had a video phone was Captain Kirk!"

First time I logged into this website it was on a 56K modem. Uphill. . . . . both ways. . . . in the snow.

 

[crfguy51]

Did you ever hear the true story of Laber flaming out an engine on short final going into CLD? lol, he took a picture of the fuel gauge showing fuel to prove he didn't do it on purpose. Saved his job.

Someone told me the story during initial, no names or anything. I didn't know if I believed it.

Randomly, later on, flying the RJ down to SAN I asked the Captain if that CLD Bro story was actually true. JL was my Captain that day. Hah.

 

[HRDiva]

We're still a relatively small company, so honestly, it hasn't come up yet. There aren't any supervisory roles for people to advance into yet. That may change next year, at which point the opportunity will be made available in longevity order. Of course, just like upgrading at an airline, training and evaluation are a part of advancement, so if you can't cut it when you're given the opportunity, then you're back to where you started.

So, if out of three people (hypothetical scenario) you have #1 who is eh, but performing, #2 who is eh and # 3 who is stellar, you would promote #1 due to seniority?

 

[Boyington]

I believe that his position is that he would fire #1 and #2, thus making #3 the senior person.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

I believe that his position is that he would fire #1 and #2, thus making #3 the senior person.

Actually, I would hope that my hiring processes would prevent numbers 1 and 2 in the first place, which so far has been the case. Failing that, yes, employees who would be described as "eh" would not be working here for long.

 

[Boyington]

With small businesses, this is possible. When you have over 1000 employees, things change. In the ideal world, all employees are great. In the real world, each has strengths and weaknesses. A good boss makes the most of their strengths, while working around their weaknesses and helps them to get better.

Putting someone on the street because someone else is better is cruel. It leads to mistrust and poor morale. If an employee knows that it doesn't matter how hard they work, they will only be promoted in chronological order, it gives no motivation for beyond adequate work. If a new employee that is great comes in, and everyone else knows that they will be fired, why help the new person?

 

[Boyington]

And besides, anything with less than 100 employees isn't a business, it's a hobby. :stir::stir::stir::stir::stir:

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Boyington, you still haven't addressed the key problem with all of your claims: your idea that one person is "better" than another without having any quantifiable means of determining so. You're really just making decisions from your gut, which likely means that it's based on your biases. You like a particular employee more, so he gets the promotion. It's not because he's really "better." Because "better" would be capable of being measured in an objective way.

And that's where you and I disagree.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

And besides, anything with less than 100 employees isn't a business, it's a hobby. :stir::stir::stir::stir::stir:

My bank account begs to differ.

 

[Boyington]

Anything less than $1.5mil a year profit is a glorified garage sale.

 

[Boyington]

If you can't tell which employee is better, then you are a pretty lousy boss.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

If you can't tell which employee is better, then you are a pretty lousy boss.

If you can't explain what objective criteria are used to determine "better," then you're just full of...well, you know.

 

[Boyington]

How do you determine which music that you listen to? Do you start at the "A"'s and work your way to "Z"? Do you watch TV shows by how many letters are in their names? Let me guess, you chose your telephone company by looking to see which has been in business the longest? Do you drive a Buick, as they are the oldest US car manufacturer?

If you can't tell which employee does a better job for you - which one would be better at a position - then I pity both you and your employees.

If given the choice between two projects/customers/whatever it is that you do, how would you decide which one that you want to take? You determine what your measurements are, and go with those. Be it profit margin, ease of the project, high profile, potential for repeat business, etc... Same thing with an employees work. An essential skill is being able to evaluate the employee.

Here's another one for you? How do you choose which employee will work for you? Do you base it on age - hiring the oldest person that applies? You evaluate them and determine which one will be the best for that position. You use a basic standard to evaluate all employees against, and then have to evaluate them using logic.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

How do you determine which music that you listen to? Do you start at the "A"'s and work your way to "Z"? Do you watch TV shows by how many letters are in their names?

You just keep proving my points, and you're so blind that you can't realize it. All of these things you list are personal tastes, not objective criteria!!! @Seggy may love Taylor Swift, but that doesn't make her "better."

If you can't tell which employee does a better job for you - which one would be better at a position - then I pity both you and your employees.

And I pity yours. Their livelihoods subject to the whims of a petty tyrant.

 

[Boyington]

I edited my last post and put in a few more comments for ya.

And yes, my employees trust my decisions. It is better than leading by blind luck, throwing a dart at a dart board to make decisions. An essential role that every manager plays is being to evaluate their employee. Like it or not, it must be done.

 

[HRDiva]

If you have someone working for you who isn't worthy of a promotion after they've been working for you for a while, then you are the failure in keeping that person around.

Nope; some people are really good at what they do and are happy doing it. They should stay on their seat on the bus.

 

[Boyington]

You just keep proving my points, and you're so blind that you can't realize it. All of these things you list are personal tastes, not objective criteria!!!

You use basic criteria that is measurable. This employee always gets their work done on time. This employee is never late to work. I have never received a complaint from a customer on this person. This person finished their work with no errors. That is that easy part. Then comes the critical thinking. The part that separates a leader from a guy that happens to just be in charge. You evaluate these things, as well as all of the other parts of their work, and go from there.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

And yes, my employees trust my decisions.

I'm sure you think so.

An essential role that every manager plays is being to evaluate their employee. Like it or not, it must be done.

No disagreement there. Where we disagree is on how they're evaluated. And you continually fail to understand the difference between subjective and objective evaluation.

 

[HRDiva]

The problem is that you consider it acceptable to keep Debbie around for 20 years when she clearly is nothing more than "adequate." Probably because you know that you can get away with only paying Debbie 70% of what you'd pay a truly good employee. As I said, bad management. Debbie should have been counseled a long time ago to improve her performance, and if she failed to do so, she should have been shown the door to make room for someone who is more than "adequate." Successful companies don't settle for adequacy.

There is nothing wrong with "meets expectations ".

 

[HRDiva]

That's actually a great example of why you're wrong. The established rubric in a college course almost always contains subjective criteria, making the ultimate grade derived from qualitative metrics rather than quantifiable metrics. We've all gotten a grade that we felt unfair, but since the method of grading is highly subjective, it's largely at the discretion of the instructor and can't be refuted.

By the same token, when employee performance reviews are done, it largely rests on the subjective views of the person doing the analysis, usually the person's immediate supervisor. Your boss doesn't like your personality, even though you do a great job? Then your performance review may be worse than your co-worker, and you're getting passed up for the promotion or pay raise. Your boss is a racist and you're black? Guess you aren't getting that raise. Etc.

That's why you need an HR person to train management and put policies and procedures in place. Then they won't do it.