Team member sulking - any suggestions?

[Blushingm]

I am a team leader and have 2 deputy positions vacant. Another 2 teams have 1 each so we advertised together. We short listed and one if my team members applied but wasn’t short listed

Shes now sulking. Not speaking to me. Not speaking to a team member who got an interview and is just making an atmosphere in the office. Even the students are picking up on it.

I found out she went to my senior to ask for a transfer - Or when the next deputy job is coming up. My senior is great and agreed that it’s good she wasn’t short listed if this is her attitude

i called her to my office to say we need to clear the air - the decision stands - I understand she’s disappointed but it’s not fair on the rest of the team - it’s disrespectful and disruptive.

I asked what she wanted me to do - her reply was nothing. I explained it wasn’t personal but other people were more experience etc - her reply - ‘well some might think differently’

now I’m really pissed off - she’s rude. Disruptive. Disrespectful. And not sure what my next step should be……I’m relatively new to team leader

@Shedmistress Did anyone tell you it’s not ok to shoot the messenger? Her training is a two way conversation for performance and development. Your training has obviously been poor. Maybe that’s why you keep having to do it?

You seem very keen on insulting anyone who disagrees with you, maybe you need to do some more?

@Shedmistress Well anyone who knows anything about performance management knows it’s a two way conversation and there are various avenues to be explored about how an employee can improve and next steps. Getting this qualification should have been part of that discussion if it was going to limit progression to the extent it has because the company uses it as an essential requirement. Not discussing that with an employee is remiss.

You cannot force people to do qualifications they do not want to do.

Also it is inhumae to push people to move up ladders they are ill equipped to climb.

The only person limiting the progression in this case is the sulking employee.

I think the only thing that you could have done better here is to deliver the news in person. In our organisation external applicants just get an email, but either the sift panel lead or the candidate's line manager would speak to internal people who hadn't got through the sift.

You had already let her know when she was applying that she didn't have the essentials.

People who are saying you should just interview everyone are being ridiculous, especially if some candidates don't even meet the essentials. The interview process takes up a lot of time! Not only do you have to prepare for the interviews and conduct them, but then each panel member needs to write them up afterwards and give feedback if necessary. It's not just an hour out of your working life.

I think it's a good idea to speak to your line manager to get advice on how to handle it.

If it was me, I would be having a one to one to address the behaviour, you understand that she is disappointed, but it is unprofessional/against your corporate behaviours to act in this way. What can you both do to move forward? Emphasise that any future deputy role would depend on the same qualification, so ask if she would like support pursuing the training. Maybe offer to review any future applications if you aren't on the recruitment panel.

How long has the stated Level 7 qualification been deemed an essential criteria for the role and were all the previous incumbents qualified to this level? Have you carried out an equality impact assessment on who applies for this qualification, who nominates them, who gets a place, who completes it and their subsequent service / career trajectory?

It is this boggins precisely that stops people doing their jobs. What a load of management waffle.

An equality impact assessment of who applies for the role, who gets a place, who completes it and their subsequent service / career trajectory?

This is the very definition of managing by committee.

Most organisations are too small to have anything like an HR department, and just have someone who runs the payroll.

I'd say to her that her reaction and ongoing behaviour proves she is not yet mature enough to handle a promotion of this sort and if she wants to be considered next time around, she needs to pull herself together and act professionally.

All the managers trying to outmanage each other and the OP on this thread is hilarious 😂

Also, the reading comprehension of the aforesaid managers is abysmal.

Isn't it just?

Great handle, BTW. I know which thread you've been on! 😂

Honestly, it's pathetic isn't it 😂

It did come in handy for the recent thread but it actually came from a thread a couple of years ago where the OP was taking her dog out and was scared of the crows attacking her. She never came back to the thread so we can only assume she was indeed murdered by a murder of murdering crows 😂

I find it interesting that so many people have said that they feel the big mistake was not telling her in person.

Personally, the worst thing would be being told in person. It would be awkward and I'd have to keep my emotions right and come out of the meeting, holding my head high and face everyone else straight away.
I'd like an email/text at home on Friday night so I could be upset on Friday, rage about it to myself on Saturday, treat myself on Sunday and go back in on Monday knowing no one would be particularly interested in what happened last week, and if it was mentioned then I could do a reasonable effort in appearing totally unbothered.

I'd probably appreciate if my manager checked in with me on the Tuesday or Wednesday and asked if I wanted a meeting to talk about how I could improve for another time. By that point I would be ready to either hear it, or have decided I was happy as I was and didn't want to apply again.

You sound disrespectful. It’s crazy that management are seeking advice from randoms on online forums. If I was your manager, I wouldn’t want you on my team as you are acting like a liability. You’re that out of your depth, that you’re seeking basic management guidance from mumsnet. Bizarre

@Shedmistress It’s not waffle. It’s called being fair and having policies that don’t discriminate unfairly. This is why so msny employers end up in a tribunal. They need clear policies on who gets on a course and why if there’s competition. It’s basic stuff really.

This.

Are you saying the company the OP works for, is at risk of a claim? What claim?

I think for 4 jobs, interviewing 7 candidates isn't very many. I hear what others have said that you can't interview everyone but honestly for that many roles I would have been tempted to. I usually work on the basis I'll need to interview 4-5 candidates per role advertised.

Edit: I should say though that I have very much got my interviews down to 1hr only. I have a bank of questions from previous interviews, I keep interviews to 45 mins, type up and score in the 15 minutes before the next one.

I should say though that I have very much got my interviews down to 1hr only.

So with seven candidates, that's a full day spent on it?

How many days would you devote to interviewing 4-5 candidates for each of four jobs?

More because nobody gets a job with only one interview!

@ChavsAreReal If you read ACAS guidance, there’s a clear need to ensure inclusion in the workplace. Not offering the training might be down to bias or unlawful discrimination. I’m not saying it is, but if the employee has a protected characteristic, then caution is needed.

Deliberately not offering the required training, whilst knowing you will put it as essential on a person spec, is clearly not allowing the staff member to progress within the organisation. The staff member has not asked for the training but the company hasn’t discussed it either. They should have done or they appear biased against that employee. The attached is acas: their sample equality, diversity and inclusion policy template where training is considered.

The staff member has not asked for the training but the company hasn’t discussed it either.

How do you know they haven't discussed it?

This 😂😂😂

Also I'm stealing the word 'boggins'. Thank you that poster.

If you knew one iota of employment law you'd know that you can only discriminate on the basis of the protected characteristics.

Being a lazy moody arse who wants to do a job they are unqualified to do is not a protected characteristic. Employment law day 1 session 1.

Most of modern HR nonsense is boggins. I would have got it from Mark and Lard.