Guest Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 hi, we have a member of staff at our setting who is basically useless. she has been at the setting for 4 years. at the beginning she was ok, better than now, but over the years she has been through a divorce, and she drinks quite in the evenings a lot now. she hasn't done anything majorly wrong, but she really treats this job as a 'break' from home, sitting at the table on her mobile or looking out the window. we recently changed her job description from assistant to 'domestic assistant' as she was not able to understand the whole planning and observation thing, no matter how much help we gave her. her new role involves making snack, changing nappies and basically all of the jobs that require no skill. we have informally brought this up with her several times, after each time things improve slightly, but quickly go back down hill. we now think that this has gone on long enough, and we have 5 other staff members who do an excellent job, but we are all struggling for hours due to low september intake. we just feel that the hours would be better split between the 'good' staff. she is a lovely person, and i would hate to come across as nasty, but she is just not suited for this job. my question is, how do we fairly dismiss this person, ensuring we are working within the law? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_8466 Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 hi, we have a member of staff at our setting who is basically useless. she has been at the setting for 4 years. at the beginning she was ok, better than now, but over the years she has been through a divorce, and she drinks quite in the evenings a lot now. she hasn't done anything majorly wrong, but she really treats this job as a 'break' from home, sitting at the table on her mobile or looking out the window. we recently changed her job description from assistant to 'domestic assistant' as she was not able to understand the whole planning and observation thing, no matter how much help we gave her. her new role involves making snack, changing nappies and basically all of the jobs that require no skill. we have informally brought this up with her several times, after each time things improve slightly, but quickly go back down hill. we now think that this has gone on long enough, and we have 5 other staff members who do an excellent job, but we are all struggling for hours due to low september intake. we just feel that the hours would be better split between the 'good' staff. she is a lovely person, and i would hate to come across as nasty, but she is just not suited for this job. my question is, how do we fairly dismiss this person, ensuring we are working within the law? I would strongly advise that you speak to ACAS about what you can and can't do - in order for your dimissal to be fair I think you would need to be able to show that you have had formal conversations about her job role and function, have clearly indicated to her what she needs to do to improve, and have given her time and support to make these improvements. If your setting has policies and procedures about dealing with staff who are underperforming/achieving then you will need to show that these have been followed. ACAS are very good and will offer you fantastic advice - they produce codes of conduct so that if your setting doesn't have the right policies in place you can show that you have followed good practice. If your staff member were to take you to an industrial tribunal you would need to prove that you had acted fairly - and the benchmark is what ACAS advocates as being good practice. Good luck. Maz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 I would second Maz's suggestion to speak to ACAS - they will talk it through with you in complete confidentiality, I found their advice invaluable in dealing with a staffing issue recently. One possibility is to make her position redundant due to the lower intake. So long as you genuinely don't need the post anymore this will save you going down the whole (long and torturous) competency route. Good luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 thankyou both for your replys, it is difficult because she is a nice girl, amy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Perhaps you could get rid of the new role you made for her, but offer her the chance to work as a keyworker again. If she was unable to grasp the skills she is likely to 'decide' to look for something else. A horrible situation for you to be in. x Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_19782 Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Do you work on renewable yearly contracts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 You need to sit her down and write a performance improvement plan. Review this every four weeks and if she hasn't improved you have evidence to go through disciplinary and get rid. It's a difficult situation to be in,, I've been there and it isn't easy - but worth it once it's all over! Good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Great advice already, if you decide on redundancy route she will be entitled to redundancy pay as she has been employed for over 2 yrs. I hope you can resolve this soon as I know such issues can be draining on everyones emotions. I hope this persons 'personal' life improves and she can move on with a more positive future. It is so hard when personal issues impact on everyone in the workplace, mixed loyalties come into play, but at the end of the day there should be an expectation of professional conduct for the sake of the children and the setting as a whole. I think from what you say you have come to the right decision (which isn't easy), the hard part now is carrying it through. Good luck. Let us know how things work out, what you learn from this (ie ACAS advice etc) may be useful for others too. Peggy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 with regard to redundancy, doesn't it have to be last in first out? we have employed someone else since her starting who is a great asset! amy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest babyjane31 Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Honeybees, I was in the unfortunate position of having to oversee 2 redundancies last year and it certianly should not be last in first out. ACAS were very helpful and guided me through the whole process in understandable english!!(no big confusing words, lol) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 with regard to redundancy, doesn't it have to be last in first out?we have employed someone else since her starting who is a great asset! amy It is the 'position' that becomes redundant, not the person, in the event of more than one person in a particular 'position' then I think first you would ask for voluntary redundancies, then I must admit I'm not sure about the last in first out rule, to me this would make sense on a financial basis, less redundancy money (if at all) to pay, but I'm not sure if it is a 'legal' requirement. ACAS will be able to advise on this. If you ask them I'd be interested in their response. Peggy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_75 Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 (edited) with regards redundancy it's not last in first out its the post/position that becomes redundant when making someone redundant it can be tricky to clarify that their position no longer exsists redundancey is probably not the cheapest option if money is tight but if you're employing someone who is not providing value for money then it might be the less painful option than sacking someone. we had a member of staff whose performance was poor she had only been with us just under 12 months I sat her down in staff appraisal explained that she needed to improve her performance and I also informed her that money was tight in the setting and we might be looking for redundances I suggestest that if she didnt feel she could improve on her performance that maybe she should consider looking for another job (I wasnt that blunt!), she resigned problem solved but I felt awful Edited September 14, 2009 by Alison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_8466 Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 we had a member of staff whose performance was poor she had only been with us just under 12 months I sat her down in staff appraisal explained that she needed to improve her performance and I also informed her that money was tight in the setting and we might be looking for redundances I suggestest that if she didnt feel she could improve on her performance that maybe she should consider looking for another job (I wasnt that blunt!), she resigned problem solved but I felt awful As you say, problem solved because she chose to resign, but I wonder if this is just the sort of situation that could leave you open to a charge of constructive dismissal. A claim of that kind would probably result in the closure of my little group. Tricky situation to resolve, isn't it? Maz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.