Or is referring to your staff as subordinates a bit shit?

[buckeejit]

Have a review this morn & one of the questions is 'effectiveness of developing subordinates'. Who wants to be referred to as a subordinate?!

Is this as awful as I think it is or standard?

"How many days off sick" is fine as an interview question btw, not one I'd use because tbh I wouldn't expect to get an honest answer anyway off someone if they had an issue with sickness, but its absolutely fine to ask.

Team or Staff are two different things. Team can be too restrictive, staff can mean anyone else in the business. Subordinates generally means anyone lower than your grade (for want of a better phrase) so it sounds to me like the form has been developed to apply to Managers with direct reports as well as people who don't, but may still provide guidance to others.

But staff can apply to everyone, subordinate is a correct term for those you directly and indirectly manage

The first part is true, but subordinate has unfortunate connotations. Seeing as teachers have got by without it in my experience, I'm curious as to why this words is seen as normal.

Absolutely fine.

"Ah boo, one less thing to complain about"

I get the feeling you'll soon find something to fill the gap with.

The first dictionary definition google brought up, for use as a noun, is "a person under the authority or control of another within an organization."

I'm not clear whether most people objecting think there shouldn't be hierarchies within a business, or if they're allowed, but we're just not allowed to use language that acknowledges their existence.

It's not terrible in the context you're talking about, but it's not really ideal. I work in internal communications and we wouldn't use it in any employee comms, even in something that was only going to managers.

The pussyfooting around terms that people don't like whilst preserving the structures that they refer to leads to lack of clarity and problems with communication as people do not understand what is expected of me.

In the workplace I know who has authority over me - and ultimately the responsibility for the decisions made and I know whom I have authority over - and responsibility for. Our pay grades reflect this.

Why then should we all call each other "colleagues" . (Obvs when talking to each other we call each other Chris/Sam/Lou/Hey You! )

Sorry - "expected of them " - should proof read.

Not a word I like either.

Many years ago a PA took it upon herself to issue throughout the company a document entitled 'How to be a good subordinate'. I referred it to our union rep and it quickly got recalled with an apology by the CEO, so not all managers like the word either. I think it comes with too many negative connotations.

A friend referred to her subordinates as minions once. I never looked at her the same way again! When I was a manager I referred to everyone as colleagues, not subordinates, not minions, not staff.

Oh and this was by a company that prided itself of the 'upside down'triagle view of its workforce - maybe it's a management style thing

I'm with you op, it just sounds condescending. I used to have a manager who thought it was funny to call me a peasant 😯 I just used to tell him he was a twat. (He got his comeuppance sacked for stealing) Who's the knob now?