New employee (Gen Z} doesn’t want to meet in person

[outofofficeon]

I took on a graduate for a new position, she’d been job hunting for a few years, I felt good about giving her a hand up into a great career.
She lives about an hour away so works remotely. She bright and polite and reliable and a good member of the team.

The problem I have is that she doesn’t want to visit the office in person or meet her colleagues in person, I offered to put her up in a nice hotel and pay travel costs so that she could spend a few days with us in person. She declined. My latest issue is that she doesn’t put her camera on when we are communicating at work as part of daily work or chats. I understand she might not be very confident but I think that you have to get out of the house / your comfort zone if you want a career.

im not sure what to do- any advice oh wise ladies.

I think there is probably a very good reason this person was job hunting for years with no success. It almost reads like you felt it was an act of charity to give her the job and it's likely to come back and bite you on the arse so to speak

Just you. I hate cameras and avoid where possible. I’m perfectly happy to be in a room of people though.

It's relevant if she's only just joined the workforce of if she's been in employment for 20 years.

Different attitudes and experience

You dont need cameras on in a contract.

The contract should state she needs to comply with all internal procedures and policies.

So you then need to have a meetings policy drafted that outlines it.

I work in a chain restaurant. Working the same role in an identical chain venue miles from my house won't develop my skills, it makes me a better option for promotion because I'll have shown myself willing to uproot my routine and be placed in a hotel away from my family life and responsibilities.

If my employer wants someone who will work across multiple branches to cover holidays then that's a role they should hire for. It's not a role I would have applied for though.

Similarly, if OP wanted a hybrid worker she should have hired one. She's hired a remote worker, and should adapt her management accordingly.

yes, when in an in person meeting, you are all facing in the same direction more or less and you don't see the faces of all attenders in the same way as you do ina zoom call

An informal policy may not be written down but is still understood and followed by employees.

If she’s too lazy to come into the office she needs to turn her camera on - that’s her choice. The world has gone completely mad when graduates brand new to a job are behaving like this. I now know why my eldest DS gets such amazing feedback from employers - it would seem he’s a rare gem in a sea of shit 🙄.

It's not really fair to brand 'Gen Z' with the same brush. I have two DCs in that bracket and they work their arses off. I sometimes think their employers take the piss, rather than the other way round. One of them in particular is doing a job above her grade for no extra pay. She said she's doing it for the experience and it doesn't matter but I'm not so sure.

In this case OP I think you should have a chat with her and see if there's anything behind this reluctance to occasionally come into the office and switch the camera on.

This. It's a disaster for the new recruit as well as the employer. The best way of learning a new job, and the kind of standards and etiquette of working in a team, is to learn by doing the job among others who can support and answer questions and supervise. If this is a people-based business it's really worrying to have someone who seems determined to avoid people, OP. If they were in the office they would learn people skills from those around them.

As someone who has run my own small business I'm horrified by your attitude towards recruitment. It shouldn't, in a small business scenario anyway, be a case of rescuing someone who's had difficulty finding a job. Your livelihood depends on this person performing well. If you have a strong team who are complaining about the new recruit's behaviour then the recruit either needs to be brought into line or let go before your strong team falls apart. You're not this individual's parent or friend, you're her employer: you have to set and monitor expectations.

How long has she been employed? If it's only a matter of months I would let her go because it seems, fundamentally, as if she's a poor fit for the role and is going to require a load of input and concern. You have up to two years before she would be able to claim unfair dismissal and I would be looking for someone more suited to the role. She will be happier in a role that doesn't require people skills and she'll find one down the line.

I agree. For all the reasons mentioned above.. You can't have people who wont engage in a workforce. It's madness.. It would be like someone on the ' old days ' coming to work with a bag over their head. Just daft.

Absolutely no need for cameras, anyone who says this is just controlling and a crap manager,
Im 13 years working remotely, havent had my camera on once. I have an excellent relationship with my team and all my TMS tht have come and gone over the years. Its not mandatory so I dont do it.
On the other hand, my dd has facial paralyis and detests camera calls, and does not turn it on. One stupid ignorant cow of a manager tried to force it once for her. That did not end well for that manager in HR.
Pick your battles and manage properly. Do your job better so she doesnt have to do what you cant manage.

For your next hire I think you should eliminate from your vocabulary the word "assume" and the expression "goes without saying". If there are minimum standards you wish to be enforced you should be clear and include them in the contract. In office once a month, cameras on in meetings etc etc. Stop assuming. Yes, yes I wouldn´t have a problem meeting you and the team and would be fine with cameras on, but as you have found out, there are other who assume differently.

I dont think you need to put something like "cameras on" in a contract - you have identified challenges with team dynamics because of her not doing so ,so you have every right to ask this of her. My OH does remote training for companies and he asks people to have cameras on precisely because of the visual feedback he gets from having that contact. If there are reasons why someone has challenges with this then that needs to be disclosed ,have you an HR person?

depends where she lives to a certain extent with the "cameras on" thing.

When i work from home (rare due to nature of my job) I cant have the camera on for calls as it takes too much internet, which being very rural is very shit and very slow. so My camera is never on - after it crashed the whole meeting out as the laptop froze up.

Now they just deal with it on theodd occasion that i do work form home.

as for the in-person part: if its not in the contract then theres nothing you can really do.

It’s been said a lot, but you need to tell her to have her camera on during meetings - I agree it’s very rude to the other people, in 121s or small team meetings. Different if it’s an all hands or a large team briefing, but in a collaborative meeting it’s definitely a barrier to good communication, and it can be really offputting for other people talking into blank screens.

her contract is for remote work but that doesn’t make it acceptable to refuse to attend any in person meetings. Again I think you should stipulate this.

I bet you've met your team face to face at least a few times though.

If the contract says fully remote and has failed to include T&C around occasional visits then the contract is at fault. It is also very unusual as most WFH contracts will have something like “up to x days per year on site, this much warning of dates”.

Cameras on/off doesn’t belong in the contract, there should be a clear policy for staff and its a failure of management if instructions around this are not enforced (or good reason received for non compliance).

Ultimately whatever the contract says if the productivity in the workplace is being hit by the new recruit's unwillingness to adapt in the smallest way to the team's needs then she is the wrong fit for the job and a mistaken hire.

Recruitment is expensive and I’d be trying to work with her to find a mid way which helps productivity but ultimately if she has a net drain effect on the team that will not just hit productivity but frustrate her colleagues and she needs replacing. Its a job, not a work placement. It has to work for both sides and the rest of the team deserve consideration as well.

Well you just have to tell her instead of ask her.

"Please turn your camera on for this meeting."
"You're needed for an in-person meeting on X date. Would you like me to book your travel and accommodation or will you do it yourself and I can re-imburse you?"

Nonsense. The woman is either meeting the terms of her contract and doing her job well, or she is not. That is all that’s relevant. The nebulous “team bonding” is something that managers use when they have lost control or lost the plot. What does it even mean? I’ve seen it applied to people who don’t join colleagues for lunch or for drinks after work. It is almost always applied to women, and is really just another stick to beat them with in the workplace.

For introverted people a day in the office is hard enough without being forced to socialise out of hours. Offices are noisy, distracting places. They don’t suit everyone. We can hark back to the days when everyone was mandated to be at a desk for 8 hours a day and pretend Gen Z are the first to have a problem with that, but they aren’t. Every insult thrown at their generation was also said about the millennial and Gen X managers who are whinging about Gen Z.

There is no generational problem with today’s young workforce. There will be good and bad in them just as there have always been. In 30 years time, Gen Z will be whining about whatever the new generation is, and all the while the workplace will evolve to meet modern day working and become more efficient and effective, just as it always has done.

I was really struck by the fact you both seem to be on different pages. You’re offering a career and a “leg up” and an opportunity. Maybe she just wants a simple 9 - 5 job with no risk or challenges?

You need to start with the camera. It needs to be on. Anything else is rude and she must have noticed that others have theirs on.

If she's not willing able to comply with a simple requirement like that then you will probably need to get rid which is not so hard in the first year....

I was remote from my team in my last job for geographic reasons. It was about 2 years before I met any of them face to face, other than the guy who hired me. It made no difference to my or their ability to do their job.

What about a remote contract don’t you understand?

Can you show me where the etiquette is written about not being on camera being rude? If someone calls my phone, they aren’t expect to see me, but if they call my teams they are? Why is it someone else is allowed to put that on me and if I capitulate I’m rude?

You don’t get to decide what is rude for someone else.