Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If I were the manager, what I would do would depends on what the job market is like. In a good job market, like now, when there are not a lot of good candidates out there looking, and it is hard to find good workers, if there was an employee whose skills were good and did good work and had a good personality but did not seem to have enough work to do, I would say to him, "It seems like you have too much free time on your hands, so I am going to give you more work." If it was during a recession, when there are plenty of other candidates out there looking for work, I might very well want to replace that person with someone who is more proactive and more of a self starter. After all, during a recession, when a company has to lay people off, there is usually much more work to go around.
That's what a good manager would do. I think the key concern that many have here is, since the manager didn't do that, is the company doesn't have extra work for the person to do. I've been in that situation where the workload I was told I'd be working didn't actually exist. Moved across country, at their expense, only to find they didn't even have a desk for me and put me as the only person in an empty building with no phone and no computer. Wouldn't wish that on anybody.
That's what a good manager would do. I think the key concern that many have here is, since the manager didn't do that, is the company doesn't have extra work for the person to do. I've been in that situation where the workload I was told I'd be working didn't actually exist. Moved across country, at their expense, only to find they didn't even have a desk for me and put me as the only person in an empty building with no phone and no computer. Wouldn't wish that on anybody.
But if that is truly the case, the next question is, if there is not enough work to keep that person busy, why are they hiring another person for that role, rather than spread out his workload among the rest of the team.
Last edited by MJoseph42286; 03-15-2024 at 11:54 AM..
But if that is truly the case, the next question is, if there is not enough work to keep that person busy, why are they hiring another person for that role, rather than spread out his workload among the rest of the team.
Just a couple of reasons I've seen:
a. Hope/anticipation that work will come. This one shows up especially in businesses that depend on getting supplier contracts.
b. Manager needs headcount to retain their job as a manager or retain their level within the organization. Where I've seen this is an organization where, if headcount drops too low, the workgroup would be folded into another.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
