Off work with stress due to boss

LegacyUser

I work at a finance company in Cork where I have been working for over 3 years.

In the middle of January a new manager came into the department and since day one she has been trying to find ways to catch me out, to cause me problems and has been looking at my work in an unusually high level of detail. she is also in charge of doing monthly quality checks on my work and picking samples of my work at random. However I found that she would always pick which would be the most awkward cases and the ones anyone is likely to have struggled on in order for this review, despite the fact that she claims they are totally random. I believe that she is purposely going through all my work to find the worst examples and then selecting these as a "random" quality check to ensure that I do not have a very good score.

Before this new boss took over, I had excellent performance scores though my 2.75 years to date at the company then and never did not meet my targets but the downturn of my scores related to the appointment of the new boss even though I was not doing anything different. Myself and him have not got on well and since she became the boss, two people resigned and another one moved departments because of him, however naturally this is played down as being due to various reasons and not connected to him when people have told me themselves the reasons for leaving after leaving (I did not solicit this information)

We argue on an almost daily basis and there had to be a HR intervention this week when someone acted as a mediator of which I would hope that would help things. However another incident happened where I marked one item of work that is not finished because of a systems issue and my boss chose that piece of work to do quality checks on and I got a very low score. she claims she did not realise that this was the case and it was just by co-incidence she picked that and that I was just jumping to conclusions which I could not back up. Of course, she is being very clever how she does this, in a way where I cannot prove what she is doing, but it is obvious.

However I asked that if she noticed this issue a week ago, why did she not query what the problem was, why did she leave it for a few days and then use it in a quality review. Because the work was not finished, the quality score was the lowest by some distance seen. Again she claimed it was a co-incidence. The way it works for me is if I notice someone makes a mistake or does something unusual, I flag it up with them straight away. she said nothing, in the knowledge that she could use this against me later on. I wrote on it there was a problem and not to include it in quality check (as past practice has been) and that made him ensure that she did the opposite since she knew it was a golden chance to catch me out.

I have spoke to HR representatives about possibly being re-deployed elsewhere in the company but they want a 2-3 stage grievance process which takes a week or two for each step before they consider either bringing in an external mediator (which I proposed) or looking at redeployment. Whilst it was not said openly, it was suggested that if I am not happy there are other ways to deal with the situation, which appeared to be an attempt to push me to resign.

Unfortunately last week my family had a bereavement and this has added to my stress levels., so much to the point I cannot function in the workplace because of everything that has been going on. I saw a doctor yesterday and I have been offered 2.5 weeks stress leave as doctor can see I am clearly stressed and overcome and has recommended that I investigate seeing external help such as a counselor, if it does not improve because my GP is worried about my condition. However I am really worried about what works reaction is going to be.

However I am scared that if I hand in a cert for 2.5 weeks the first thing they are going to do is invite me to a disciplinary meeting, as when I took 2 days off in January that were certified for being ill, I was told that my absence levels are too high. Now I am off on stress leave the last thing I need is some time where they will bring me right back into a disciplinary the day I get back. It makes me feel I should continue working, but actually I don't want to be there right now since I cannot do any work as I am sleepy, terrible headache, stressed, fatigued and cannot sleep or concentrate.

Looking for any advice here.

Mrs OBumble

You don't have a choice: your doctor has certified that you are not fit for work, so you cannot work.

Hand in the certificate. Use the first week to calm down, and the second one to start job-hunting.

waraf

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

..start job-hunting.

+1 on that. This is business - there's absolutely no loyalty in business regardless of what any company tells their employees.

Take your set of skills to another employer. You'll reduce your stress levels and you might even make an extra few quid in the move.

Avatar MIA

Sorry to hear of the bereavement.

Re work. There seems to be some semantics about what is random. If your supervisor is finding mistakes in your work then it's natural for them to continue to look into your work.

Also, you are not being singled out, others seem to be treated the same way.

It does seem like this manager has been tasked with improving quality or is out to make a name by improving quality. Either is perfectly fine.

The one sure way to get him/her (you're a bit confused in your writing) off your back is to stop making mistakes on the complicated files. Is there something you can do on that score?

If you feel you cannot go into work - as you say the doctor will provide a sick cert if you want - then you shouldn't go in.

However, the company has its own policies that they may follow. We cannot answer that for you.

A fresh start may be what you need, but possibly not in exactly the same job.

Good luck

Stheno

Who is the "him" you keep referring to?

NUTLEY BOY

Ultimately, resignation and a new employer might be the best answer. However, I would be very slow about doing that until all internal options have been explored. Basically, you should not be bullied or forced out of your job because of one bad article or hit-woman who may be engaged in a deliberate dirty operation to force people out by bullying and undermining.

If your employment history with your previous [current] employer is checked "back channel" it might not look good as the unfair implication might be that the problem lies with you.

Also, it may come up at interview with a prospective new employer that they will ask why you are leaving your current / previous position.

I think that the ideal situation would be one where you can run the internal company processes to a conclusion that is satisfactory to you - not them. When that occurs you can then leave and be able to have it to say for the record that you operated an internal HR process and it was resolved in your favour. That would eliminate any adverse inferences about your ability when dealing with a prospective new employer.

Mrs OBumble is right about taking time.

Right now you are in a horrible situation. You are not the first or the only person to whom this kind of nasty treatment has ever been directed. You will be able to resolve it. Do not make any hasty decisions about job hunting until you get the internal affairs with your current employer sorted out first.

I suggest - if not done already - that you write up as detailed a summary of events as is possible and while it is still fresh in your mind. This is very good for clarification of thinking and recall of relevant evidence. When you go back to work keep a daily diary at home of everything everything that happens.

I wish you well.

LegacyUser

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Re work. There seems to be some semantics about what is random. If your supervisor is finding mistakes in your work then it's natural for them to continue to look into your work.

Also, you are not being singled out, others seem to be treated the same way. It does seem like this manager has been tasked with improving quality or is out to make a name by improving quality. Either is perfectly fine.

The thing is though it's not being done equally. People are being judged in very different ways, for example the marking is being done much more strict in the cases of myself and the people who have already left, with us it is being done to the letter of the guidelines whereas with others discretion and common sense is being used.

What is extremely cynical is the way that they are claiming that work is being picked at random and that there is no cherry picking of work which is likely to try and prove a point. I asked if someone from outside the department could verify it or be present when quality checks are carried out or they would pull extra samples over the month to see if they are in line with the previous samples pulled. The thing is that they won't do that and say that the business does not have the time to do it,

I agree that it is no bad thing that quality should be brought up to scratch, but at the same time systematically going through hundreds of cases in some case, having a brief look at them and finding the worst few and making sure they are included and that any ones which are of a high standard (the overwhelming majority) are left out, is against the whole process which is supposed to be random, but it isn't and is being manipulated. What annoys me is the fact they continue to state it's just a co-incidence.

The one sure way to get him/her (you're a bit confused in your writing) off your back is to stop making mistakes on the complicated files. Is there something you can do on that score?

The trouble is that in our work a lot of stuff is discretion and using our own judgement. Also there are various technical issues which are happening on a regular basis as well as limitations of the current system which are causing a lot of these issues. When there are such issues, it's often used as an opportunity to nail me, by including these in quality checks, knowing that this will effect the quality of the work, whereas when other people have these issues, are not having such work pulled as the quality check. The fact that 5% of the work a month is pulled for quality and I can predict almost fully what will be included in that 5% every month before ti happens shows you how "random" it is.

I have an excellent rapport and reputation with my colleagues and I believe that my boss may well see me as a "threat" within the team because a lot of the staff members always come to me and depend on me for a lot of stuff. Over the past couple of months she's been using my performance as a way to try and isolate me form the rest of the team, one of my colleagues believes that she is trying to run a very tight ship where she shows who is boss and who is in control and she is trying to put me in my place so to speak. One member of our team, longer service than me, recently left because of our boss, he said that he could not work here any longer as he is being undermined on a regular basis. The thing that the people who have left in the last few months all have in common is that they have been long serving team members who have been there longer than the boss and many believe this is all about an axis of power.

LegacyUser

Stheno wrote: »

Who is the "him" you keep referring to?

Originally I wrote with her and changed to him, to try and make it harder to identify who I was talking about, however I forgot to change she to he

LegacyUser

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Ultimately, resignation and a new employer might be the best answer. However, I would be very slow about doing that until all internal options have been explored. Basically, you should not be bullied or forced out of your job because of one bad article or hit-woman who may be engaged in a deliberate dirty operation to force people out by bullying and undermining.

The problem is, that she has a boss, who is most likely a part of this as well and the thing with my boss is that she is the kind of person who will do anything to suck up to anyone especially her boss. After one meeting with HR recently my boss ran straight up the stairs to his bosses office laughing about the meeting, I didn't hear about what they said, but considering my boss has only been in a management position for 4 months and it's her first position, the stuff he does and say indicates she is getting some advice from someone more experienced who may well be driving it and she is sucking up to him.

A few colleagues have said that they believe there is ulterior motives to try and remove me and this has been going on for a number of months and it is all about a power struggle in the department and my boss being uncomfortable with the reputation I have within the department and sees it as a threat to him. She is an extreme micro-manager who wants every little thing we do logged, every break to the minute, clock in clock out and always knows best. The most frustrating thing in our mediation meetings is she speaks her opinion as fact, it's always "I know" or "The situation is" or "You have to do" or "No matter what you say I know that..." It doesn't matter what I say to her, she has her own beliefs and nothing will change them. She believes she knows how I feel and what I think and if I say anything different I am not being honest. To a large degree HR are being unhelpful as they are sticking behind their manager, since a lot of what she does is not easy to prove even if I know it is going on, she is very clever in how she does this.

If your employment history with your previous [current] employer is checked "back channel" it might not look good as the unfair implication might be that the problem lies with you.

What do you mean back channel? Before she took over as my boss, I had always achieved Excellent bi-yearly reviews and sometimes outstanding. I never failed any metric.

I think that the ideal situation would be one where you can run the internal company processes to a conclusion that is satisfactory to you - not them. When that occurs you can then leave and be able to have it to say for the record that you operated an internal HR process and it was resolved in your favour. That would eliminate any adverse inferences about your ability when dealing with a prospective new employer.

How would I do this when HR for the most part are siding with everything my boss says. I can understand it to a degree because she's being very clever and crafty with the way she goes about it, She is using any kind of technicality she can, for example as I said, there are some long written rules in our job going back a year or two and none of these rules have been changed. However the boss then turns around and says to me that this rule is no longer in place, which effects my work. I ask her where was the notification it no longer applied and she said process change all the time and whilst we did not specifically say that the rule did no longer apply, this rule has not been talked about for many months so therefore why do you feel it still exists.

The thing is as soon as she noticed that there was something that I was doing that was no longer the process, she could have let me know and told me and I would correct the work. All it takes a little heads up and everyone is fine. That is what she does with other staff. But with me for her it is a golden opportunity to catch me out, so she says nothing about it until after it's been put through a quality audit, which she makes sure happens on that file, that can be weeks after she first noticed the issue. Any reasonable employer who was concerned about quality would want mistakes fixed straight away and confusions cleared up. But in her case rather than give me a heads up she wants to use it as a way to hang me later on and wait. Then I get a lecture about how such things can negatively impact the business and the company, which I agree it can, but by her own admission she is checking large quantities of my work, but always claims that this has no influence over what is pulled for quality, which is 'totally random'.

Right now you are in a horrible situation. You are not the first or the only person to whom this kind of nasty treatment has ever been directed. You will be able to resolve it. Do not make any hasty decisions about job hunting until you get the internal affairs with your current employer sorted out first.

I have told them I will not resign no matter what and if they are going to try and force me to they are wasting their time. However I have serious doubts about the ability of the HR to resolve issues in the company as I think the people are too close, however there is no chance we could get someone external in either, I haven't specifically mentioned the topic yet, but they have stated when the first mediation meeting happened that they would not entertain it or any re-assignment until after the internal process is complete.

LegacyUser

I should say I mean that at first I did not propose an external mediator but I did this week, when ti came ot a head, even though they first of all stated that they would not entertain one,

I believe that someone external would be very helpful.

LegacyUser

OP - with all respect to you , I think you need to take a step back and have an honest look at your performance. Sometimes it can be difficult for us all to critically review our own work.

If you felt that your manager was in some way fabricating that you were putting in a poor performance then that would be one thing, but from what you have written you have acknowledged that the work was wrong. You have said that part of this manager's role is quality checks and if she has uncovered a quality issue it is unfair of you to expect her to turn a blind eye. You have spoken of multiple errors so it would appear there is some merit to the issues she is raising. Similarly, you have been spoken to about your absence levels being too high - then perhaps this is the truth of the situation and something you need to focus on improving. From reading your post it does not appear your manager is holding you to any higher standard that your colleagues - her expectation ( understandably) is that errors be an exception and not the norm. Other posters have spoken of bullying or being forced out of your role - but unless you can prove that your manager is accepting the same level of errors from your colleagues and not from you then I don't believe this is bullying.

Would it not be easier to try and address the performance and attendance issue by open and honest discussion and work on implementing an improvement plan and schedule ? HR can facilitate this by drawing up an agreed standard between the two of you. If you meet it then your work is improving and your manager will be in no position to question your performance.

Stress Leave is no resolution to this problem as the core issue will still have to be resolved on your return to work.

Irish_Elect_Eng

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Sorry to hear of the bereavement.

Re work. There seems to be some semantics about what is random. If your supervisor is finding mistakes in your work then it's natural for them to continue to look into your work.

Also, you are not being singled out, others seem to be treated the same way.

It does seem like this manager has been tasked with improving quality or is out to make a name by improving quality. Either is perfectly fine.

The one sure way to get him/her (you're a bit confused in your writing) off your back is to stop making mistakes on the complicated files. Is there something you can do on that score?

If you feel you cannot go into work - as you say the doctor will provide a sick cert if you want - then you shouldn't go in.

However, the company has its own policies that they may follow. We cannot answer that for you.

A fresh start may be what you need, but possibly not in exactly the same job.

Good luck

Avatar MIA has some good points here.

The simplest way to resolve the issue is to attack the one thing that your manger can find fault in, that is the error in your work. Whenever we get a new boss we have to learn their preference and sometimes have to change our work style to match theirs to be successful. You mention past practice, well you should clarify with your boss which practices need to change or stay the same.

Perhaps the approach should be to engage with your boss each time there is a task where you are unsure of the quality, the type the boss has been pulling and resolve the issue with the bosses support. Then the boss will see the challenging tasks and get a better appreciation of the work that you are doing.

When I am reviewing my staff's work I always review the difficult elements of the tasks, it is the most effective way to identify and correct errors, reviewing simple ore repetitive task that the staff can do in their sleep is pointless. (Note: We do not score these reviews, they are conducted with the purpose of offering feedback on performance and development)

I would see this as an interpersonal clash between you and your manager rather than either of you dong anything significantly wrong.

devnull

If you are being set-up as you see it by your boss, could you not ask that someone neutral overviews your work if at all possible. I don't know how your quality is done, but if it only takes a short amount of time, could it be possible that if there are a large number of files you work on, that someone else is present when the files for review are selected, such as a member of HR, and they then pick the files for review and your boss then reviews them and the person in HR documents the whole process.

Two things could happen, both of which would cast doubt on your boss:
1) Your boss will complain that certain files cannot be pulled for some reason, this will straight away set off a red signal to HR.
2) The scores will be vastly better because the pulls are more random and not in line with previous reviews.

If you send this request to them in written form and they refuse it will not look very good later on if they intend to try and push you out. The fact that they are refusing external mediation will not help them either.

Secondly if practice has changed and your boss has not communicated for this, in the first instance with my subordinates I would not punish them, I'd have a gentle word and give them time to correct this, rather than going for the jugular and using it as a method to try and score points over someone which your boss seems to be doing.

Whilst I agree with some of the answers to your post, if a process is random it should be that, all of us know that there are ways to influence such processes. Just like you can pull "random" quality to make sure you make someone looks bad, you can do it the reverse way. I used to work in a MNC 10 years ago where when two people were going for a promotion suddenly the person who was favourite with the boss was getting highest quality ever saw and the other person was getting lowest ever saw. However eventually the boss was eventually investigated by HR for bullying and was demoted and given a final warning.

What happened was the employee who was being shafted, was reviewed for quality every week. They worked on approx 100 cases a week. 3 cases were to be reviewed by quality a week. The employee was successfully able to post himself a letter on a Friday, that he got on Tuesday to himself with quality reviews on a Wednesday. Each week for a whole month he could pick the 3 cases out of 100 that would be picked at "random" At the end of a month, he gave all the letters to HR and was able to predict all 12 cases out of 400 that were pulled. The postmark was proof of the date he sent them to himself.

Nobody can know if it is truly random or not and of course your boss can be out to get you, there are many strategies of "managing out" an employee and this may be the case here, but you will find it very difficult to prove it because there are people in most large Multinationals who will be excellent at doing this, if you are working in one you have to be very clever how you do it.

Of course the fact is that the best way is getting the quality up on every case, but I appreciate that it seems your boss may be applying different rules to you, but again even though that may or may not be the case, you have to look at it from HR's side. You are making allegations that you cannot back-up so they will not take them seriously.

NUTLEY BOY

Back channel means that a prospective employer might talk to your current employer off the record. This is a classically sneaky method of getting a reference that a current employer would not dare to write and it provides a cowardly opportunity to traduce your reputation.

You have a history of excellent performance according to your employer as that is what is in your appraisals as written by them. That just cannot be ignored or denied especially if it is in the form of a written performance assessment. I suspect that yours is not the performance that needs scrutiny.

I see clearly the disrespect and the contempt that you are being shown. This is definitely something that needs ultimately to be taken out of the clutches of the employer and adjudicated upon by a neutral third party.

Although it probably would not apply here I am minded conceptually of the legal maxim nemo judex in causa sua. This means that no man shall be a judge in his own cause. Technically the employers are acting as the judge in their own cause and that is why an independent third party would be the one to resolve this. Ultimately, you may need to instruct a solicitor dealing with employment law to step in and get a grip on this for you. If you are a member of a union they should be able to recommend somebody suitable for the task.

devnull

Another thought - surely if someones performance took a dive just after a change in manager and you always had good performance prior to that and you state there have been people leaving since (how does it compare with the previous few months before she took over) that should be a signal to HR that something is not quite right?

No doubt they will argue it is co-incidences, but I can see why they are not going to mediation from what you have said, because of the fact that there are a few things that will go against them. They're far more likely to try and bring you down the lines they are doing with now in the hope you will get fed up, look elsewhere and leave because the process is long and drawn out.

The fact that you claim you are a senior member of staff and they are trying to isolate you from the rest of the team suggests to me that they are already preparing for your exit and ensuring that it has minimum possible impact on the company by making sure nobody relies on you.

Clearlier

devnull wrote: »

Another thought - surely if someones performance took a dive just after a change in manager and you always had good performance prior to that and you state there have been people leaving since (how does it compare with the previous few months before she took over) that should be a signal to HR that something is not quite right?

No doubt they will argue it is co-incidences, but I can see why they are not going to mediation from what you have said, because of the fact that there are a few things that will go against them. They're far more likely to try and bring you down the lines they are doing with now in the hope you will get fed up, look elsewhere and leave because the process is long and drawn out.

The fact that you claim you are a senior member of staff and they are trying to isolate you from the rest of the team suggests to me that they are already preparing for your exit and ensuring that it has minimum possible impact on the company by making sure nobody relies on you.

Devil's advocate. Perhaps the previous manager wasn't up to scratch and didn't manage the team effectively. Perhaps the new manager is applying a standard that is more appropriate. That would make it particularly difficult for the OP as their previous work level which they believed to be good is now more accurately described as inadequate.

N.B. I have absolutely no way of knowing whether the above is actually the case or not. I'm just pointing out that because a new manager identifies a problem that the old manager didn't doesn't mean that the new manager caused the problem.

OP - It does sound like you're being managed out. I'm not aware of your circumstances but in general if you can find an alternative position where your work is valued you'll be far happier regardless of the right and wrongs of the case. The wrong end of a power struggle where the manger is blindly backed by HR is a miserable place to be.

If you haven't already you need to start documenting everything, date, time, actions, quotes etc.. As far as possible stick to facts.

Good luck. I hope that it works out for you.

superflyninja

I don't think accusing the OP of doing shoddy work is fair. Its pretty clear from her description that the boss's intention is to undermine her and get her to leave. The OP made it clear that a lot of the work depends on judgement and isn't a binary correct/wrong situation and the only cases brought up by the manager in the "random" reviews are those examples open to interpretation. From the sounds of it the questionable cases are a very low percentage and yet they are the only ones brought up for review. If the manager was interested in retaining her then surely they would suggest improvements to the work or training and help the OP to achieve rather than just pinning blame and tut tutting her?
But if the OP and the others who were hounded out have been clearly treated differently to other junior staff thats not right. Seems to me though that even if the OP put in a 100% perfect workload each month the boss would find something else to pin on her. If I were you I'd use the stress leave to get the CV in order and get out.

NB I dont know how much of what the OP said is accurate, Im just going on what they said.

Burger Please

I don't know what finance company you work for but I have experience in one kind all my life to date and you seriously need to grow a pair, ignore whatever dirty water you boss is throwing and get your work done. Just be better than them at your work, then just pick them off at promotion time. When I was starting off along with my peers, we were essentially our bosses bitch, you did what ever the hell they asked, worked crazy hours, but never complained or you would be fired in some way or another. Then you gained respect and climbed rank and you got your own bitches, and so the cycle goes. It is a cut throat industry at the end of the day so maybe your type of personality is better suited to a job where you get flowery emails saying every thing is great, rather than a bollocking from someone across the floor.