[seneca]

Having a severely unperforming, and sometimes belligerent, employee that couldn't be fired because of HR reasons. His work was horrible, and his responses to feedback was to become hostile.

Not only was he dead weight, he destroyed the team's morale and hurt their relationships with other teams. The team looked to me to solve the issue and couldn't understand why he wasn't being fired, and I couldn't tell them "I'm not allowed to fire him".

I spent months working with him on improvement plans, coaching, and mediating with no improvement, and in the end managed to shake him off in a RIF.

I stayed long enough to repair the team's morale and strengthen the hiring process, and then quit as I had completely lost faith in the company.

[xmprt]

What reason did HR give for you not being able to fire him? I think at least some members of the team would be understanding.

Also, I'm not sure if you tried this, but I've heard in cases where you can't fire someone, you recommend them for internal transfer and give the other manager good reviews of them. It's a bit scummy but it's the most positive outcome for the team.

[seneca]

> What reason did HR give for you not being able to fire him?

I don't want to ignore the question, but it's a sensitive topic and I'm not sure bringing it up would add to the conversation.

> Also, I'm not sure if you tried this, but I've heard in cases where you can't fire someone, you recommend them for internal transfer and give the other manager good reviews of them.

Yes, I actually had a peer recommended this as well. In the end, I decided against it as I felt it was unethical. I didn't want to get rid of a problem by becoming one myself.

[jawns]

I don't think you need to divulge any sensitive details, but unless this is a "one in a million" occurrence, it's possible that others might be faced with a similar situation in the future, so it might be useful to share at least some broad details. Was HR concerned that it would lead to legal problems, e.g. an ADA violation or a claim of discrimination against a protected category? Or was it more like a nepotism issue? As a manager, I would likely handle those in different ways.

[darkerside]

You've lost the trust of people reading this thread just as much as you lost the trust of your team when you couldn't find a way to be appropriately transparent with them. For a problem that affects them daily, you can't really leave it at, it just is what it is.

You can say there was a medical issue, or a discrimination issue, or nepotism. If you say nothing, people have to assume the worst.

The worst in this case is probably people assuming you didn't try very hard to fire them.

[kwertyoowiyop]

AKA “pass the trash.” Even if execs & HR don’t preemptively catch such an attempt, don’t do it. You’ll wreck your own relationship with the receiving manager, and it will likely look bad for you as well. Do it only if you genuinely think the employee will do better on the other team, you have an honest and detailed conversation with the receiving manager, then that manager has an honest conversation with the employee about the specific issues & problems.

[underwater]

Anyone tries to do that to me and I'm out. Thats the road to a competitive and shitty management culture.

You can try and create a bubble of goodness in your own team, but you still exist in a sea of shit. Eventually that sea will drown you.

[Spooky23]

People who are good at being assholes can use HR to their advantage.

You can selectively “seed” your personal problems with EAP to establish documentation of stuff and use that to make termination difficult or delay. Some people will go so far as to make claims of alcoholism and parlay that. Gumming up the works is effective, as one HR screwup and the employee is good to go. Sometimes you can get promoted for being an asshole.

[brobinson]

I worked at a company in the US where HR would not let us fire an employee who was viciously attacking other employees in public. The employee in question had a medical condition covered under the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act). Perhaps OP's case was similar.

[jonathankoren]

This sounds like HR is falling down on the job there. ADA accommodations don’t include attacking someone. That’s easily a for-cause reason.

[jawns]

Indeed. And in such a case, the greater risk, legally speaking, is a lawsuit from the employees who are victims of such attacks. The employer can't just claim, as a defense, that their hands were tied because of the ADA.