New employee with serious problems
Discussion
We hired a new member of staff recently. We were unsure of him from the interview and wouldn't have hired him normally, but as we needed the extra manpower we offered him a chance, with a low-ish salary and a one-month trial, starting 11th September.
He was late on day 2 and called in sick on his third day. He received a reminder on the 4th day that he is on trial. I gave him the benefit of the doubt as he was doing a good job and was learning very quickly - besides I could fire him at any point. On the 5th day he asked for an advance so he could buy some petrol as he's been out of work for many months and his partner is at home managing 3 kids. But as he doesn't have a bank account I needed to pay a cheque into his partner's account. Still, it was only £100 and it covered the work he'd already done, so the money wasn't an issue.
His work is very good, but clearly something didn't seem right.
Last Mon-Wed, all was good and he worked hard. But Thursday and Friday he didn't come in at all. His partner has had a nervous breakdown, as she can't cope with the kids (all under 6), and social services were visiting over the weekend to arrange in-house care or take her into hospital. She is scared about what she may do to the children when he is out, and worries for her own safety. They clearly have a very troubled past.
He came in this week Monday and Tuesday, and did a great job, picking up his September salary cheque (minus the earlier advance). But yesterday he didn't come in, and was battling with social services who have now taken all 3 of their kids into care overnight and may be sectioning his partner. Therefore he's in court again today and says he will not be in the office until Monday.
So, it's true that "we're a business not a charity", but equally I want to help desequally he needs to get out of a vicious circle. I can't chuck him out on the street, but should we pay for the days he hasn't been in? Etc.
I don't believe he's a liar, as social services called here to talk to him when he was out at lunch on Tuesday. But I don't know if he's a druggie or has a criminal record etc.
I have half a mind to tell him not to bother coming in on Monday and just cut our losses, but - thinking of the children - if it helps him get his footing back into society and get his kids and family back in a few months, then it's worth hanging onto him.
A tough one, eh!
He was late on day 2 and called in sick on his third day. He received a reminder on the 4th day that he is on trial. I gave him the benefit of the doubt as he was doing a good job and was learning very quickly - besides I could fire him at any point. On the 5th day he asked for an advance so he could buy some petrol as he's been out of work for many months and his partner is at home managing 3 kids. But as he doesn't have a bank account I needed to pay a cheque into his partner's account. Still, it was only £100 and it covered the work he'd already done, so the money wasn't an issue.
His work is very good, but clearly something didn't seem right.
Last Mon-Wed, all was good and he worked hard. But Thursday and Friday he didn't come in at all. His partner has had a nervous breakdown, as she can't cope with the kids (all under 6), and social services were visiting over the weekend to arrange in-house care or take her into hospital. She is scared about what she may do to the children when he is out, and worries for her own safety. They clearly have a very troubled past.
He came in this week Monday and Tuesday, and did a great job, picking up his September salary cheque (minus the earlier advance). But yesterday he didn't come in, and was battling with social services who have now taken all 3 of their kids into care overnight and may be sectioning his partner. Therefore he's in court again today and says he will not be in the office until Monday.
So, it's true that "we're a business not a charity", but equally I want to help desequally he needs to get out of a vicious circle. I can't chuck him out on the street, but should we pay for the days he hasn't been in? Etc.
I don't believe he's a liar, as social services called here to talk to him when he was out at lunch on Tuesday. But I don't know if he's a druggie or has a criminal record etc.
I have half a mind to tell him not to bother coming in on Monday and just cut our losses, but - thinking of the children - if it helps him get his footing back into society and get his kids and family back in a few months, then it's worth hanging onto him.
A tough one, eh!
With my purely logical hat on - can you afford to have someone on the payroll who, although they do a good job when they are there, are chronically unreliable?
At the very least, only extend his trial period for another month maximum, and make sure it's in writing....
It could be very difficult to get rid if he can pull any sort of illness card - I suggest you consult an employment solicitor ASAP if you are even thinking about keeping him on....
Personally, I wouldn't take the risk.
As you say, you are a business, not a charity....
At the very least, only extend his trial period for another month maximum, and make sure it's in writing....
It could be very difficult to get rid if he can pull any sort of illness card - I suggest you consult an employment solicitor ASAP if you are even thinking about keeping him on....
Personally, I wouldn't take the risk.
As you say, you are a business, not a charity....
If you genuinely see him as a prospect based on the good bits, and that you like him...
Ask him to put all his cards on the table;
Social services
Personal
Money
Lifestyle choices (maybe not what drug of choice just yet)
And tell him what you're telling us, that you appreciate he's going through the mill, but you are not a charity and if he's straight with you, you can both reach a mutual balh blah, he get's out of the sh1t and you get a good worker.
Chances are he's bottling up a lot of stress - knowing his partner isn't coping, knowing his kids are at risk, knowing he can't even turn up for work for a couple of days without something going wrong.... anyway - this might accoount for his inability to communicate (he might actually be embarrased by it all, strange coping mechanisms we have!)
Let him know you are willing to let him gradually take the piss more and more because of this initial breakdown in communication. Let his problems grow so that he does turn to drink/trancs, let the rift grow. Start to hate his disheveled beard and his poor hygene, make him the scapegoat for all the company worries. Villify him,
Nah bollox, kick him back on the streets with all the other theiving gypsy bastards...
Or take him to the pub (or somewhere informal) and talk...
Ask him to put all his cards on the table;
Social services
Personal
Money
Lifestyle choices (maybe not what drug of choice just yet)
And tell him what you're telling us, that you appreciate he's going through the mill, but you are not a charity and if he's straight with you, you can both reach a mutual balh blah, he get's out of the sh1t and you get a good worker.
Chances are he's bottling up a lot of stress - knowing his partner isn't coping, knowing his kids are at risk, knowing he can't even turn up for work for a couple of days without something going wrong.... anyway - this might accoount for his inability to communicate (he might actually be embarrased by it all, strange coping mechanisms we have!)
Let him know you are willing to let him gradually take the piss more and more because of this initial breakdown in communication. Let his problems grow so that he does turn to drink/trancs, let the rift grow. Start to hate his disheveled beard and his poor hygene, make him the scapegoat for all the company worries. Villify him,
Nah bollox, kick him back on the streets with all the other theiving gypsy bastards...
Or take him to the pub (or somewhere informal) and talk...
Phil Hopkins said:
Forgive me if you've answered this already but have you tried sitting down with him personally and talking to him about it? You could explain the situation from your point of view about not being a charity but yet wanting to do the right thing and bat the ball back into his court?
Yes, we've had a proper chat, and he is desperate to keep his job, knowing that it could disappear at any moment because of the circumstances.
How ever good he is, I need to have the confidence that he'll be fully focused and committed once he is sorted. Or he might turn out to be a perpetual drain, and that's no good either for the business or for the perception of the other staff.
jacobyte said:
Phil Hopkins said:
Forgive me if you've answered this already but have you tried sitting down with him personally and talking to him about it? You could explain the situation from your point of view about not being a charity but yet wanting to do the right thing and bat the ball back into his court?
Yes, we've had a proper chat, and he is desperate to keep his job, knowing that it could disappear at any moment because of the circumstances.
How ever good he is, I need to have the confidence that he'll be fully focused and committed once he is sorted. Or he might turn out to be a perpetual drain, and that's no good either for the business or for the perception of the other staff.
Okay - this might sound evil, and i'm donning a fire retardent suit...
But - if his kids are taken into care, his wife sectioned...
It might actually be what he needs to sort his life out.
I know it sounds bad, but from what you said, all his problems revolve around having 3 children his wife cannot care for, and while he isnt reliable - perhaps this is the wife being demanding on him.
With both problems taken care of, he may be able to focus much better, and concentrate on getting his life back on track.
Of course, this doesnt help you in the short term, but perhaps talk with him, and explain as symphatetic as you are, he needs to decide where his commitment is - not in a bad way, but if he wants to hang onto his kids, then he should focus there, if he wants to have a job, his focus should be with you...
I have no idea what line of work you are in or how many other employees you have but you do also have a duty of care to them. It might be difficult for them to see someone getting special treatment, more importantly you mention his kids going into care, social services and your suspicion of drugs - you have no idea really who you are dealing with and it's not right that your other employees be exposed to any risk from him.
You do have a good attitude towards him but I doubt he'll ever understand or appreciate that, certainly in the short term it as sounds like his life is a real mess. You could suggest he goes away & comes back to see you in a couple of months when he can work regular hours.
You do have a good attitude towards him but I doubt he'll ever understand or appreciate that, certainly in the short term it as sounds like his life is a real mess. You could suggest he goes away & comes back to see you in a couple of months when he can work regular hours.
Give him a fortnight's last chance trial.
Explain that despite you having sympathy for his personal circumstances, they are not your problem. You have a business to run at a profit and are not able to continue in this turn up when it suits set up.
Failing that agree to let him go.
Sorry, but if your business can afford passengers then it is not efficiently run.
Explain that despite you having sympathy for his personal circumstances, they are not your problem. You have a business to run at a profit and are not able to continue in this turn up when it suits set up.
Failing that agree to let him go.
Sorry, but if your business can afford passengers then it is not efficiently run.
parakitamol said:
I have no idea what line of work you are in or how many other employees you have but you do also have a duty of care to them. It might be difficult for them to see someone getting special treatment, more importantly you mention his kids going into care, social services and your suspicion of drugs - you have no idea really who you are dealing with and it's not right that your other employees be exposed to any risk from him.
Well I have to say that my view with regards to other employess would be 'tough bloody luck'. Always being utterly equal is one of the UKs biggest employment issues....I hate how hard it is to make exceptions. And people who get upset if someone else gets 'special treatment' of this nature should maybe try having a complete nightmare of a home life before whining (god, sorry, but of a rant there!)
Jacobyte...I find your entire outlook utterly laudable and i seriously hope you help him out and get a great employee long term, in return. Dunno why you think he might be a druggie unless he's shown signs whilst being at work. If he hasn't, again who cares?
Just keep a track on employment or trial longevity in case he turns out to be awful after all so you can still bin him.
Nice one you
Night
Edited by nightmare on Thursday 28th September 17:07
I don't think it's 'tough bloody luck' at all for an employee if they have to work alongside someone with potentially dangerous problems (in this case it could be mental health & drug problems).
Quite frankly I'd find that terrifying, this chap sounds pretty unpredictable.
I think Jacobyte is showing remarkable social awareness, and applaud him for that but I still feel he has a very strong duty to his current employees...
Quite frankly I'd find that terrifying, this chap sounds pretty unpredictable.
I think Jacobyte is showing remarkable social awareness, and applaud him for that but I still feel he has a very strong duty to his current employees...
Please note that I do not suspect any drink/drug problem - I just alluded to the possibility of it as an unknown, as it may be considered more likely for someone who is struggling to deal with a hard life.
Regarding the other staff, I have told them at a high level that he's got trouble at home, so that's being managed.
Again, thanks for the replies (both on here and PM'd).
I've never thought of myself as "socially aware", but when I was an employee I knew how I wanted to be treated. Now that the shoe is on the other foot I like to think I'm living up to my own perception of how a decent company should be run: a hard working and enjoyable working environment, with harsh but fair and realistic disipline. We only had 4 staff a year ago when we started, and are now up to 7 plus two contractors.
One of our guys left in May to go to another company for more money. After two weeks he hated his new job as he missed the working lifestyle with us, and asked for his job back. I took him back with open arms and he loves it - I reckon he's a keeper.
Regarding the other staff, I have told them at a high level that he's got trouble at home, so that's being managed.
Again, thanks for the replies (both on here and PM'd).
I've never thought of myself as "socially aware", but when I was an employee I knew how I wanted to be treated. Now that the shoe is on the other foot I like to think I'm living up to my own perception of how a decent company should be run: a hard working and enjoyable working environment, with harsh but fair and realistic disipline. We only had 4 staff a year ago when we started, and are now up to 7 plus two contractors.
One of our guys left in May to go to another company for more money. After two weeks he hated his new job as he missed the working lifestyle with us, and asked for his job back. I took him back with open arms and he loves it - I reckon he's a keeper.
parakitamol said:
I don't think it's 'tough bloody luck' at all for an employee if they have to work alongside someone with potentially dangerous problems (in this case it could be mental health & drug problems).
Quite frankly I'd find that terrifying, this chap sounds pretty unpredictable.
Quite frankly I'd find that terrifying, this chap sounds pretty unpredictable.
eh>? I dont know where you got this from....Im sure he was mentioning 'there could be other things wrong'. That happens to be true of everyone you work with. If Jacobyte had said "this bloke turns up and whilst his work is good he makes effigies of other workers and reads the bible upside down glowering in a corner' I'd be right with you.
What you seem to be suggesting is that cos his wife is unwell, and the resultant fallout has made his appearance at work unpredictable, he's also doubltess on drugs, a menteller and about to kill the rest of the workforce. jees!!
I can see where you're coming from..... It's surely a noble thing.
It seems to me though, that if you're short of people, and he's it, that's what you have to work with.
I don't think you should be paying him, if he's not there. If you need him to be there, and he can't be, then maybe you need to find someone who can augment his capabilities.
It's true that most employers just get rid of anyone who won't or can't deal with a conventional employment relationship, and the world is a worse place for it. Your native acceptance of his difficulties and ability to accomodate is really a good thing. You can't however, go on hoping that he's going to be there, and have it all fall apart because he's not.
You and your business have to survive, you can't let his problems drag you down. If you can support him and are willing, why not? He obviously has the capability to help you, even if it's not quite like the help you want.
If you ask me this is where the obvious problem in the employment market has now got to. There is so much legislation that employment relationships are not what they should be.
It should be the case that if someone can help someone else, then then the former pays the latter for that help. If not, then that's it.
What we have in practice is a situation where employers try to turn employees into something they don't want to be. Employees become unhappy, and their performance declines. Employers struggle to make ends meet, and they become more and more critical of their staff.
On top of this, employers can't get rid of staff that can't help them. So they become more concerned about taking the wrong people on, and those that they do have to behave as clones. Because of this people can't change jobs when they become unhappy, and those that are still boyant in the market don't add value because they'd never disagree with their employer.
It's a vicious cycle, brought about by red tape.
It seems to me though, that if you're short of people, and he's it, that's what you have to work with.
I don't think you should be paying him, if he's not there. If you need him to be there, and he can't be, then maybe you need to find someone who can augment his capabilities.
It's true that most employers just get rid of anyone who won't or can't deal with a conventional employment relationship, and the world is a worse place for it. Your native acceptance of his difficulties and ability to accomodate is really a good thing. You can't however, go on hoping that he's going to be there, and have it all fall apart because he's not.
You and your business have to survive, you can't let his problems drag you down. If you can support him and are willing, why not? He obviously has the capability to help you, even if it's not quite like the help you want.
If you ask me this is where the obvious problem in the employment market has now got to. There is so much legislation that employment relationships are not what they should be.
It should be the case that if someone can help someone else, then then the former pays the latter for that help. If not, then that's it.
What we have in practice is a situation where employers try to turn employees into something they don't want to be. Employees become unhappy, and their performance declines. Employers struggle to make ends meet, and they become more and more critical of their staff.
On top of this, employers can't get rid of staff that can't help them. So they become more concerned about taking the wrong people on, and those that they do have to behave as clones. Because of this people can't change jobs when they become unhappy, and those that are still boyant in the market don't add value because they'd never disagree with their employer.
It's a vicious cycle, brought about by red tape.
Edited by dilbert on Thursday 28th September 17:46
You're in the fortunate position to be able to help him.
Zero hours contract sounds good, and from what you say his work is fine.
Personally I think its good that he's trying to earn rather than sponge - which would be pretty easy given the circumstances.
Of course, its easy for me to say with it not being my business.
Zero hours contract sounds good, and from what you say his work is fine.
Personally I think its good that he's trying to earn rather than sponge - which would be pretty easy given the circumstances.
Of course, its easy for me to say with it not being my business.
I have already sent my 2 pence worth via PM, but if he currently fits the bill and is able to do the work then i think you should give him a chance but only on either a Zero hour contract or on a part time basis allowing him time to sort his life out in the time out of work.
I think that this would give him some self respect that he is earning his on crust and will not be branded a sponger, but all of us bottle up our problems until we cant cope for reasons of shame, being looked at treated differently. If you are in a position to help him get back on his feet with little downsides to your business then give it a go. But if he is on a client facing side of things i would personally think twice about this or change his role so he does not have to meet the clients as often as you wish.
Let us know your decison
Steve
I think that this would give him some self respect that he is earning his on crust and will not be branded a sponger, but all of us bottle up our problems until we cant cope for reasons of shame, being looked at treated differently. If you are in a position to help him get back on his feet with little downsides to your business then give it a go. But if he is on a client facing side of things i would personally think twice about this or change his role so he does not have to meet the clients as often as you wish.
Let us know your decison
Steve
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff