"Probationary Period"
ScorpioHR
338 Posts
Well, here I am, back again looking for the excellent advise of the forumites! I am in the process of updating our employee handbook. I was not involved in the original edition as their was no HR Director then.
I have had many conflicting opinions over the term "Probationary Period". I have heard that when you use that term, you are stating that after the 90 days they are permanent ee's till the dirt goes over them. I have heard that it really means nothing and serves NO purpose other than to take up room in your handbook. Then there is the group that thinks it is o.k. to call it a "90 day waiting period" (as in waiting for benefits pkg. to kick in)-What say all of you?
x:-/
scorpio
I have had many conflicting opinions over the term "Probationary Period". I have heard that when you use that term, you are stating that after the 90 days they are permanent ee's till the dirt goes over them. I have heard that it really means nothing and serves NO purpose other than to take up room in your handbook. Then there is the group that thinks it is o.k. to call it a "90 day waiting period" (as in waiting for benefits pkg. to kick in)-What say all of you?
x:-/
scorpio
Comments
We use it, but every time I think about it, I come closer to abolishing it from our handbook. This is just my moring opinion.
As a practical matter, it really serves no purpose other than benefits eligibility, since at-will applies during and after the intro period. For us, it just helps clarify an individual's status during the first few months.
While the probationary status changes nothing as to the strict letter of the law, it may change the perception of a jury-- should it ever come to that. I believe it gives the ER a stronger case for termination if it is clearly spelled out in policy that failure to perform successfully during the probationary period may will result in termination of employment.
However, we are very careful to state repeatedly in our Manual that we are an at-will ER, that nothing in the Manual is to be construed as weakening the at-will provision, and that the Manual itself is not to be construed as a contract for employment. We also further state that an EE may be terminated at any point during their probationary period (including prior to the end date of that period) if they are not making satisfactory progress.
>We use the term introductory period and
>specifically state that during this period a new
>employee's performance will be scrutinized and
>regular feedback provided, prior to a formal
>review at the end of 90 days. The employee also
>receives no benefits during this period. Once
>the introductory period is complete, the
>employee becomes eligible for benefits and is
>considered a "regular" employee.
>
>As a practical matter, it really serves no
>purpose other than benefits eligibility, since
>at-will applies during and after the intro
>period. For us, it just helps clarify an
>individual's status during the first few months.
INITIAL EMPLOYMENT PERIOD
During the first three months of your employment, your performance will be evaluated periodically by your process manager and reviewed with you. After this written review, you will be asked to sign the form to show that it has been reviewed with you. If you do not agree with something in the review, there is a place on the form for you to make a note of it. At the end of this three-month period you will become a regular employee .
The term “regular employee” does not imply or establish any relationship beyond the employment at-will relationship that exists between the employee and the Company.
We don't use the term "probationary period" at all. In our benefits' SPD's we refer to waiting periods before benefits begin (1st of month following hire date).
I don't see any purpose served by culling out a "probationary" or "introductory" period. Employment-at-will always gives you the ability to term for performance or for "fit" - just as long as it's not pretextual for discriminatory reasons. And instead, you should be giving ALL employees regular performance feedback, not just the new employees.
{I really don't mean this to sound harsh if it reads that way!}xhugs
From my perspective, the first three months (or so) can be a critical time. It's when a brand new employee is exposed to a particular company's methods of operation, its culture, process, people, etc. It's also the time when both the new employee and company can best determine whether there is a good "fit" within the organization. More feedback and coaching during this period, I think, can assist a new employee in transitioning to their new job and working environment. Just my opinion.
To that I would say, don't forget about the 12 week FML and the concurrent STD and LTD that will surely follow.x;-)
Most every HR training program I have attended has recommended that you do not use the term probationary in your hand book.
Thanks,
Dutch2
Thank you for your help forumites! I am thinking maybe "newbie...watch out!!!" is what I shall settle on (a little humor).
scorpio
Well, thankyouverymuch Beagle#-o I think I know what it means, but, where is The Don? I bet he would put that acronym out there in a way that would not cause the x:=| to censor it!
scorpiox:D
(1) They have stamped on my forehead a mark that tells me and everybody else that for a certain number of days I am less than a real player here, even though they told me I would be when they recruited me.
(2) For X number of days, this place will not invest enough in me to give me the benefits my family needs and they say it's because it would be too administratively challenging to do that since they might terminate me later. I could do a helluva lot better job if I didn't have the added stress of three more months of COBRA.
(3) They've given me two more of these probationary people that requires me to track them and fill out these damned papers on them and evaluate them and hold their hand. Look, I'm the guy you've gotta please. We can fire you for any reason during your probation.
(4) You better hurry up and fire this dunce. Once you let him get past 90 days, you've got his ass forever!
(5) I'm not sure I want to work here. They schmoozed me and courted me during recruitment, then they categorize me as less than everybody else. No benefits, people giving me the feeling I'm under a microscope, telling me I'm outa here unless I please these two people for 90 days.
I'm in the camp that thinks 'probation', 'try out', 'introductory period', 'initial phase', 'orientation period' and 'grunt stage' are as outdated and useless as 'maternity leave'.
Orientation to the company, gaining benefits, receiving training, adjusting to policies, and learning jobs, taken together, is a process rather than a series of destinations. A horizontal continuum, not a vertical ladder.
I do think the largest outcome of those terms is the notions we give supervisors about what they can do to the employee while in that 'period'.
Then BAM, within a week or so after those initial 90 days, out comes MR. HYDE, their kids develop continuous ongoing illnesses, their car has more issues then a Jerry Springer show, they forgot to mention that once a month for a week they have to leave and go to another state to take care of their elderly parent.
There are definitely two sides to every issue, I was trying to find out what would be the best way to identify the initial employment period. I have never cared for the phrase "probation period" always smacked of San Quentin to me-I think that I shall go with "Oreintation Period" it seem's to say it all.
Thanks!
scorpio
I don't know the logic behind my company's decision to go with a probationary period and have searched for one over the last 3 years.
What I have found is that there may have been a (weak) connection with unemployment in Florida. There does seem to be a stipulation that if an employee is informed within 7 days after hire that he/she is in a probationary period, and if involuntary termination occurs within the first 90 days, the employer can be relieved of an unemployment burden. I've decided that the concept is idealistic and that reality is in the fine print. The fine print seems to be that the employee is disqualified from unemployment benefits until the discharged probationary employee satisfies certain earnings criteria downstream at another employer. Once the conditions are met, the burden is back and the reason for the downstream termination determines whether we pay benefits. Our reason for involuntary discharge no longer has any bearing on the decision on whether benefits are payable.
The second thing I found is that a lot of excess verbiage is required in the policy manual in other policies to explain that at-will is not diluted by a probationary period, and release from probation is still no guarantee of employment (i.e., employees move from "probationary" status to "regular" status).
I am reluctant to criticize my predecessors, but my experience has been that a cost-benefit analysis might yield that its just cheaper to forget any references to "probationary."
The employees know when hired that they will be in a 30-day probation period, which "allows them sufficient time to learn the job"; if they are doing well at that point, haven't had attendance issues, etc., we will raise them $1.00 / hour. If things aren't going so smoothly, we'll extend it to 60 days, or max it out to 90 days, if necessary. We've only had to extend a couple people to 60 days. Usually early in the probation period, we know what type of "real" worker we've hired and it's clear whether that $1.00 / hour is earned or if we need to cut our losses.
You must be reasonable.....death in family, a sick child.....but if someone has issues, is missing once a week in the first month or so... lookout.
My $0.02 worth,
DJ The Balloonman
I hired someone with HR experience to fill my company's HR clerical support position, the only other position in my department besides mine. The new hire fooled us all. Until the 90th day, work performance was marginal but acceptable, and there was a commitment by the person to learn the "corporate way" and improve. I gave what I thought was a fair evaluation and released the employee from probationary status. We discussed strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement, but things turned south quickly. As it turns out, the prior HR experience taught the person just enough to be dangerous, operating just barely within acceptable parameters until the day it came to an abrupt halt--the person walked off the job in the middle of a critical and intense project before a 2nd 90 days was over.