Must be in good standing...or not?

MJONES

Our company is moving to a new software program that will affect 100% of our operating business. Employees have been selected to attend train the trainer training across the country for two weeks. This is definitely a reward for the persons selected. The project manager has selected an employee with a less than desirable history with the company. She is one incident away from being terminated for attendance, is on a performance improvement plan for performance and has been given 2 LOA for substance abuse within the last 18 months. Ambassador for the company, I think not. I am going to address our unsuspecting VP with the news on Monday. In addition to the obvious, what are some other reasons NOT to reward this behavior? I have cited rewarding poor behavior/performance, no justification in selection process, setting a precedence for making such decisions, low morale, (some other employees are "HOT") HR was not given the full story when initially told about the training. I could go on. I want the VP to see the full impact of moving forward with such a poor decision.

Don D

Maybe I missed your question. Just reading what you posted, I'm wondering if HR has any role whatsoever in this training and the selection of trainees. If you don't, what is the basis for your assumption that you should come to the rescue of the unsuspecting and uninformed VP? If you've been asked (or have a historical role) to assist with populating the training classes and seeing that it works, fine. If not, this might be a situation where HR is butting in and assuming its input is needed where it is not.

Are you too anxious to paint a scarlet 'A' on this woman's chest?

Hunter1

I agree with you. In addition to this being a poor selection from a morale standpoint, and seemingly rewarding a poor employee, you stand a good chance of losing this person to discplinary action before she is able to do the training with fellow employees. My question is how the project manager selected this poor performer without getting input on her in the first place? I do think it is your place to intervene at this time.

Balloonman1

How much does it cost to train the trainer? If she is close to being terminated I would be hesitant.
I do not allow employees who have been suspended for attendance to go to training opportunities that are both for training and a reward for good work.
My $0.02 worth,
DJ The Balloonman

ritaanz

This employee is a heart beat away from termination. I feel that it is your responsibility to inform the VP of this person's employment history. The objective is to train her so she can train others in the company. This selection is not good for the company or for the program.

Why would you need more reasons for her not to be included? You have listed several. The primary ones being attendance and performance. This VP's selection looks very fishy to me. No one is that dumb or naive.

Dasher

Something is fishy here! If the selected employee is as problematic as you report -- the criteria used to select the trainee/trainer is wacky. While it may be okay for you to speak with the VP and mention your concerns, it does not appear to be in your perview to raise a fuss on this issue.

I am with Don on this one. Either you have left something out (like, trainees were selected by drawing names from a hat); or your VP wants his project to fail; or you are not giving us the full story on why you think this employee is unsuitable for the training opportunity.

AJ SPHR

Can you also help explain the role of project manager vs the VP - are they one and the same person? If not, it sounds like project manager may not know the background of employees selected (if he/she doesn't actually supervise the person). Does VP have responsibility for the project itself and is over the project manager?

I agree with others that you need to be careful how you approach this with the VP. This shouldn't be a "man was that a stupid decision to select this person!" but instead a "I want to make you aware of something that may need your attention/input".

marc

There are plenty of issues here, but to piggyback on Don's point, I wonder about inappropriate communication around supposedly confidential employee information. If you do not have a policy regarding EEs being in good standing before they can participate in certain functions, then perhaps you should consider adopting one.

Communication is such an important tool, and it is appropriate to communicate some things, but not others. The two LOA's, for instance, could be considered protected HIPPA information - are there some issues to consider about your own reputation and how you deal with confidential information?

To me, the idea of spending dollars on a person who is near termination is important, but just because she is near it does not mean your progressive discipline policy will not work. You should carefully think through this - perhaps you have terminated her in your mind and all you are doing is marking time - waiting for the ax to drop.