> Managers who are the sort of people who don't value helping your colleagues
Helping, yes certainly one of the core requirements being a manager is unblocking direct reports from whatever they're doing.
But it has limits, because you as a manager have finite time. I've got seven direct reports, three are relatively new hires and so consume most of my "help". Of the remainder another three are great senior devs who can be trusted with getting the broad brush strokes of a problem and going off independently to delve in.
One however, a struggling senior dev with junior dev capabilities, and having major childcare issues at home is totally floundering, pulling sick days and basically failing. As a manager I basically don't have capacity to commit the amount of time required to pull them out of it, and I'm trying to move them off the team.
whatever else, that major childcare issues comment right there should tell anyone "don't work at that company, because hey your child gets cancer they don't care and will try to figure out a way to fire you. Probably by saying you have 'junior dev capabilities'"
if someone is underperforming due to those kinds of problems then to say they have junior dev abilities seems somewhat insulting, which is especially contemptible because it is wrong to insult someone that is going through an especially difficult time, especially as the person doing the insulting might not be able to handle the situation any better themselves.
So first off I expect not to insult people in that case.
Then I might expect something like "unfortunately due to the extreme medical situation the family finds themselves in I do not feel this person can fulfill their duties at the company any longer, and will need to be let, following company policy / legal requirements in our area that means the following rights pertain ...."
that is to say instead of moving them out by saying they have junior dev capabilities and are just failing, acting honorably in the firing process and taking whatever hit the company is supposed to take.
In other words I expect the company to pursue its benefit, but honorably and not as a scumbag. Your "what else do you expect to actually happen" suggests that you think it is likely the company will be a scumbag, your "that's nice and all" seems to imply that you think being a scumbag is not just likely but somehow also correct.
on edit: referring to the legal rights and responsibilities of company may also in some cases be that the employee has rights to paid leave and similar things. So it does not necessarily mean that someone will be fired, depending on where this situation is taking place.
Something similar came up in another HN comment thread I was in a few months ago -- someone hired at senior level, but ended up only having junior level skills.
The root issue, imho, is there's no accepted corporate method of demoting an employee (in the US).
Which is unfortunate, because it would benefit both the company (who retains someone with training and familiarity) and the employee (who isn't fired).
"Lower expectations for lower money" shouldn't be verboten, but it is.
> there's no accepted corporate method of demoting an employee (in the US)
Legally or culturally?
Where I live (Europe), seems it's legally prohibited, sort of, to lower someone's salary, if the employee doesn't agree (which maybe is obvious, there's a job contract agreement after all). The company would need to fire and rehire the person at a lower salary, but firing people isn't easy.
> constructive dismissal ... generally ... grants [the employee] the right to pursue claims against the employer.
> once agreed upon, wages are implicitly locked in by the common-law of contract as an essential term of the employment relationship. In this regard, it is a constructive dismissal if ...
(That last section is about the UK, I suppose it's the same in the US.)
This is why if you’re telling someone something they don’t want to hear it’s best to only give one reason.
Senior dev overleveled and performing at junior level is one thing. Personal issues impacting performance is another. They have totally different solutions and just mentioning them together sounds like the manager has an axe to grind.
it may be true that these have different causes in a particular situation, but given the variability and length of employment in most companies and projects for everyone involved (managers and programmers) I would think it more likely that a manager wouldn't actually have enough data to reliably separate the two conditions when dealing with it.
That's a pretty weak excuse that would raise serious concerns if one of my managers said it to me. The job of a manager is to debug these kinds of things, and frankly, distinguishing between technical gaps and personal issues is the easiest form of this. That's not to say you never get it wrong, but you listen, adjust and course correct.
Based on what you’ve said, are you confident that you’re delegating enough? I mean, you kind of answered your own questions - you’ve got three seniors. Are they really senior or senior-in-title? If really senior then they should be helping take on some of the junior mentoring.
Be wary of the hero, “only I can do it”, mentality as a manager. It only leads to burnout.
Not to be antagonistic, but just as a practical matter to consider: if your account username is your real name then I would be careful talking about your direct reports like this. People who you work with might see it.
Have you talked to your "failing" team member about this? Have you worked together to try and identify a path towards improvement? Off the top of my head, perhaps they would benefit from more WFH time? Or perhaps a period of part-time work? Perhaps their duties could be shifted around so that they can contribute in a different way for a while? Could they take over some of your mentoring duties?
I mean, this is the bread and butter of your job as a manager, right? Getting the best out of your people?
You can give your team members more responsibility. Tech leads, buddies, owners of initiatibmves etc. are things. The juniors shouldn't be sucking too much at just your teet.
Helping, yes certainly one of the core requirements being a manager is unblocking direct reports from whatever they're doing.
But it has limits, because you as a manager have finite time. I've got seven direct reports, three are relatively new hires and so consume most of my "help". Of the remainder another three are great senior devs who can be trusted with getting the broad brush strokes of a problem and going off independently to delve in.
One however, a struggling senior dev with junior dev capabilities, and having major childcare issues at home is totally floundering, pulling sick days and basically failing. As a manager I basically don't have capacity to commit the amount of time required to pull them out of it, and I'm trying to move them off the team.