>In many jurisdictions (not in the US I suppose), before firing someone for poor performance they must be told that their performance is inadequate and be given a chance to improve.

Performance Improvement Plans are a thing at larger companies. That said, once someone is on a PIP, the handwriting is almost certainly on the wall.

I've also worked with people who were incredibly oblivious about the quality of their work, however much feedback they received and however much rework others had to put in. I can think of at least one case where this went on far too long and they were incredibly shocked when they were let go.

I'd argue PIP is meant to give you a chance to find another job.

For legal reasons most employers will only verify dates of employment. 2 months of so of PIP is more than enough to find a new role.

This is another reason to not get too attached to any job. I come to work for money, not to feel apart of something.

You WILL get fired if your in this industry. Hell, I've quit several jobs since the manager sucked.

Demanding salary employees work nights regularly is good way to get em to quit.

Imagine if America had a NHS style system, vs the horrific employer provided system. Then more people would be free to quit bad jobs.

Let's say you have an abusive manager, but your husband has an expensive to treat illness. You just need to suffer since if you leave your husband won't have access to treatment

>2 months of so of PIP is more than enough to find a new role.

I think a lot of people here underestimate the difficulty of landing a new job depending on your background, overall skill level, experience, and location.

2 months is a much better deal than getting fired on the spot.

At best you find a new job, at worse you have time to cut back on your spending

The PIP thing varies. Some companies just use them as a risk reducing tool to fire people, but a few really believe in them and will keep employees who've gone through them. I take a dim view of that, personally, just because it ends up feeling like management-by-fear.

It doesn't have to. At its best, PIP is a very open, transparent, communicative, supportive method - here is what we need; here's how we believe you can help us; let's work together to meet our mutual targets.

As others have said, in a good company and team, PIP is one amongst many coaching tools, rarely the first one, and can be useful in various situations - somebody not taking a hint or being oblivious, indicator of seriousness, but also to those with potential who need structure and benefit from explicit list. And yes of course, a paper trail and a documented process if things don't work out for various reasons.

I mean, it comes down to how much you trust your HR department to treat you as a human. If you work someplace where that kind of rapport is normal, then great! But that's not been my experience.

Right; in my current company, PIP is created and held by your Coach / Manager. It's orthogonal on whether HR treats you as human :D

People can get their act together especially if external factors were a significant part of the problem. That said, assuming they can find employment elsewhere--which may be easier or harder depending on their skills and location--they're probably better starting fresh somewhere else.

My view is that if your employer is telling you to come to Jesus, the productive relationship is already gone. Work isn't a marriage or a family; if it's not working, you don't have to take extraordinary measures to preserve it.

I think managers call HR and put a person on a PIP only after good will and patience have been exhausted, so it's a sign that the person does not improve despite feedback and that management has had enough... So, yeah, writing is on the wall.

> once someone is on a PIP, the handwriting is almost certainly on the wall.

My current manager is particularly transparent about this (with other managers, at least). When he puts someone on a PIP, it is a formality. He deliberately chooses a redemption project that is impossible to achieve.

Edit: Jeez, guys, don't downvote -me- ;-). It's not my policy.

In a better world, that would be illegal.

This is likely something that HR would flip out about seeing in writing because being given an impossible redemption task would probably be interpreted as constructive termination in a court.

Ouch. That is unfortunate on several levels. From legal to moral to practical.

Depending on the company, that could easily be appealed/disputed.

My assumption is that HR would be irritated to find out he was doing that. Legally, I assume 'at will' handily covers it as long as nobody being targeted is a member of a protect class.

Personally, I do sort of understand his view. He does not like to put anyone on a PIP, and by the time he gets there, he has already concluded that the relationship is not saveable. In his mind, everyone involved should know that the PIP is a formality, and ideally they'd use the time to find another job and have a smooth transition. HR probably would not agree to firing someone with a few months of severance.

That’s a bad thing to do, unless his goal is to create an easy employment law settlement, in which case it’s kind of cool. :)

What sort of impossible projects does he assign?

I've seen both sides of this: a PIP for a person who was falling behind that wasn't possible for the person to achieve because they were in a role without the skills needed to succeed in that role, and a PIP that was based on one supervisor's bad opinion of a particular person that was easy to accomplish when put in place by a different supervisor.

I have had lots of employees who I think had poor performance but weren't bad people and I don't like the thought that they're in bad financial situation or just feeling emotional distress over being fired. Every manager I've known has felt terrible while firing people.

That doesn't mean the firing shouldn't happen, but it does mean that everyone feels bad.