Manager I manage refusing to manage someone

[MumofCandR]

I line-manage a manager who has raised serious allegations—including refusal to follow instructions—about an employee (A). An investigation concluded with A receiving a written warning rather than dismissal. The manager disagrees with the outcome and emailed me and my manager, stating they don’t want to manage A and believe they will re-offend (they had previously talked to me about this, prior to the hearing) . I'm unhappy that:

1. they bypassed me by copying in my manager, and
2. I suspect my manager may suggest I take over managing A.

How would you approach this situation?

It doesn't work that way.... There's a management structure for a reason. I can't quite believe some of the odd comments....

You understand the manager deems this more serious than you give credit for so skipped you and went higher?
Think about that.

Tell them to get on with their fucking job or they’ll be next in line for a disciplinary

I think a lot of commenters here haven’t worked at senior management level in a corporate environment. Some of the advice is bonkers.

OP, I think this is an HR issue. I’d get formal advice from them before taking any further action.

To be clear to the issues were not interpersonal to that manager - they were not involved in any way. The manager did make separate (less serious) statements about the staff member ignoring management instructions. In fact HR were concerned their manager should have written evidence of prior warnings of these allegations, and when the more serious complaint came in they then raised this to HR.

Yep - they've deemed this, doesn't make them right!

Thanks for your response, I think you're right. I agree solving this problem by 'just' kicking it to another manager is insane, they're clearly not managers ( at least I hope they're not for their organisations sake).

Thanks for your unsolicited views.

If the threshold was not met for Gross Misconduct and the person was given a written warning I’m not sure the manager can refuse to manage them?
The manager needs to continue to manage them in an unbiased way and report any ‘reoffending’ to you as their line manager and then it would obviously be escalated.
As a manager they can’t pick and choose who they manage, ultimately the person was found ‘not guilty’ of gross misconduct so the process is finished for the complaint.
All you can do is put into writing how you can support them fulfil there role as manager, because that’s your duty as their line manger.

Why so rude?

You've said we clearly don't know all the details from your deliberately high level info, you're telling people their suggestions won't work, so obviously you know more about it than we do. So what are you looking for from this thread?

I've been a manager for 13 years. In my view moving A is the best thing to do. If that absolutely won't work (are you civil service/public sector?) then you need to performance manage B (their manager). They might need additional training, or they might need to just adjust their behaviours and expectations. Getting advice from HR and/or your manager is a good idea.

Your manager can't pick and choose who they manage, but they can submit a grievance against you if they feel you've failed to support them. Dependent on the nature of As behaviour towards your manager, it may actually be deemed unreasonable for you to be insisting they continue to manage A. So if I were you, I'd tread very carefully and be prepared to discuss this at a much deeper level than 'it's your job to manage who we tell you to'.
Your best bet is to talk to your manager supportively. Tell them that the aim is to resolve the situation so that they can manage A in a way they feel confident about. Explain why the business needs them to manage A rather than anyone else (if you don't have a good reason here, that's a weak spot) and ask what support they need from you to do it. Document the meeting.
If they continue to refuse, then you'll need to escalate it higher, but will have done nothing they can criticise you for.

Best not start threads then, or at least post a CV for applications to qualify for the role of giving you advice.

Honestly, people are posting here in good faith.

Even if they're wrong, it's incredibly rude to respond as you have.

One of your stated concerns originally was that you might have to manage the person so you are just contradicting yourself here.

If your manager reviews this process and takes the view that it is untenable for the existing management structure to continue because of the history between the manager and staff member then surely you will be consistent in your own requirement that people respect a process.

This is a ‘people’ thing and an awkward one, so get a conversation with your HR person for input on a plan to manage the situation.

That plan might look like:

• You, As manager and HR sit down and talk through the approach for managing A going forward. How that feeds into 1:1s, appraisals, performance reviews, performance monitoring etc. a PIP might be a relevant option to consider.
• You, As manager and your manager sit down and talk through the risks that A is concerned about issues reoccurring, and how between you you’ll mitigate those risks.

It would seem from As managers response that they’re concerned there might be future issues and aren’t comfortable being left solo to handle those. The above avoids any buck passing but also confirms support via the line and appropriate escalation.

Surely it's common sense they're kept apart.

How would you feel about making allegations so severe about someone you felt they should be fired, only for you to have to remain in the very same position that caused the offences they were disciplined for?

You now need to support the manager while they manage the employee, unless there is a parallel manager who could become the employee's LM, which would probably be the best way forward.

Person A admitted to the allegations and was punished accordingly. The manager needs to be professional and get on with their job. The manager wasn’t involved in what happened so they need to remain impartial

@MumofCandR I agree you need to bring HR into the solution.

The manager needs to continue to manage A.

From the managers perspective they have been given a shit job to do.

The discipline process will have negatively impacted both A and their manager in terms of:

• Their working relationship (mutual trust & confidence)
• their mental health
• focusing their resource on management not deliverables.

The manager will also know that continuing to manage A will create more work for them and negatively impact their mental health. They will also doubt they will truly be supported to manage A.

Slopey shoulders at senior level exists, managers follow procedures and do everything right and senior managers don’t follow through.

What you need to do is convince the manager that if they follow procedures they will 100% be backed and not left in a cycle of A going through performance management/disciplinary and senior managers giving them another chance. I’ve seen it happen too many times that senior managers bottle it.

I agree

That the manager that you manage continues to line manage employee A

I just wanted go offer some support for the OP. Managing an employee properly takes a lot of time and effort. I would be really annoyed to pick up an extra direct report and all the work that comes with them just because someone else decided they didn’t want to.