Unfair Performance Review

mr_porridge

Hi All,

Just looking for some advice here, I have been in my current role for about 4 years now and I have always received favorable reviews from managers.

My previous manager gave me some negative feedback which I found totally unjustified as no examples of me not performing as expected where provided. I got the impression he was trying to get me out of the Org. I found out he had slated me to some senior people while he was my manager.

6 months later I now have a new manager, my most recent performance review has returned to being all positive and I have been given more responsibility in my role. I have not noticeably changed my behavior since the negative feedback, in fact, I was very demoralized by the previous feedback I had received and I was planning to leave my current role.

I lost out on a considerable amount of money, bonus-wise and my current manager essentially said that there is nothing he can do about it and we should just move on. Should I just let it be or seek advice higher up?


Thanks

amcalester

Forget about it. The time to query it has long past.

Annoying as it may be.

Xterminator

to recap.

After 3 good years, (and presumably 3 good bonuses) you had a bad review you didn't agree with, made worse by a manager you didn't work well with. your bonus reflected this. you were contemplating leaving your role.

6 months later & you have just had a good review under a new manager who you can work for, who has allowed you more responsibility.

And you are taking the negatives out of this situation? do you want to make a bad impression on the new manager?

PS a bonus is exactly that, your not 'entitled' to 100% of what's available for bonus.

_Brian

Move on, your flogging a dead horse, if you had an issue you should have fully appealed at the time, if as you say there was no evidence then surely an appeal would have been a slam dunk??

Also, getting a poor rating may just mean you did ok but others just did better, it’s essentially a moving target each year. I don’t fully agree with such dogged ranking but it exists and people should fully understand it.

beauf

Forget about it. If you keep getting good reviews, and do well, the manager who did the bad review loses credibility.

ButtersSuki

The likely outcome of any sort of appeal on this will be that nothing will change with your original negative review, but you will likely have done some reputational damage to yourself by complaining/appealing.



I know it sucks, but that's how this stuff works.

DeanAustin

Forget about it and move on. It’s a battle you’re never going to win. You’ll just do yourself damage.

witchgirl26

OP I've been there. You should have really appealed the original negative review at the time. They're not going to re-instate a bonus from a previous year because you've gotten a good review now.

The question you need to think of is if you want to stay in the organisation. If you're happy with how things are going now, then put the bad review behind you and move on. If you don't think you can, it may be time to start looking elsewhere for your own sake.

I had 2 brilliant reviews in my old job followed by a slating that I could not understand. My manager changed shortly after that and they couldn't understand it either based on a few months working with me. Despite their best efforts to show me I was appreciated and good work recognised, it was too late to repair the damage and I left a year after the bad review. Full knowing that I was about to be handed a promotion and a raise but I couldn't have stayed.

OMM 0000

I agree completely with Xterminator's assessment.

It sounds like you're living in the past. I think you should try to live in the present. It sounds like your present is going quite well.

STB.

Xterminator wrote: »

to recap.

After 3 good years, (and presumably 3 good bonuses) you had a bad review you didn't agree with, made worse by a manager you didn't work well with. your bonus reflected this. you were contemplating leaving your role.

6 months later & you have just had a good review under a new manager who you can work for, who has allowed you more responsibility.

And you are taking the negatives out of this situation? do you want to make a bad impression on the new manager?

PS a bonus is exactly that, your not 'entitled' to 100% of what's available for bonus.

I think its more likely that the OP thinks they have been treated unfairly. They may also be trying to clear their name having been made aware that the manager "slated the OP to Senior Management".

The OP is in their current role for about 4 years now and I have always received favorable reviews from managers

Given their history of good reviews and that they get on with their current manager and there are no issues underlines that there was either an catastrophic incident or a personality clash with the previous manager.

If performance is tied to money, then the manager who provided the negative review who did not provide examples better have a good explanation as to what happened.

Manager, its in the title. If someone isn't performing, there is a way to deal with it. It doesn't begin and end with a once off review. Sounds like a terrible manager and a liability to the employer.

I suggest you look up some WRC cases, Xterminator. Not following procedures is what gets employers in trouble.

OP look up the procedures for performance evaluations in your organisation. If it came out of the blue and is as you describe then your employer has not protected you.

Despite some of the posts here maintaining that bonuses are not guaranteed, if performance is tied into this, then your company better have good reasons why you didnt get your bonus. This negative review was six months ago ? Challenge it immediately.

witchgirl26

STB. wrote: »

I suggest you look up some WRC cases, Xterminator. Not following procedures is what gets employers in trouble.

OP look up the procedures for performance evaluations in your organisation. If it came out of the blue and is as you describe then your employer has not protected you.

But surely having a performance review is part of the procedures. I mean I had a similar situation to the OP but in reality all the company's prescribed procedures in terms of performance reviews and documenting same were followed so I didn't really have a case at all.

Performance reviews results may come out of the blue but as long as it's done in a formal way, then the company is actually protected.

The employer HR department is never concerned about protecting the employee - they're concerned with protecting the company.

STB. wrote: »

Despite some of the posts here maintaining that bonuses are not guaranteed, if performance is tied into this, then your company better have good reasons why you didnt get your bonus. This negative review was six months ago ? Challenge it immediately.

If your bonus is not guaranteed per your contract they can decide not to give it to you for any reason they want. My bonus is a non-contractual one. There is a % that is based on company returns and a % that is based on performance. However the company can decide that no bonus is being paid next year and I would have no come back on that. If it's a contractual bonus, then yes you have a case but non-contractual don't. Performance being tied into it means nothing.

STB.

witchgirl26 wrote: »

But surely having a performance review is part of the procedures. I mean I had a similar situation to the OP but in reality all the company's prescribed procedures in terms of performance reviews and documenting same were followed so I didn't really have a case at all.

There should be procedures for performance reviews within the company.

witchgirl26 wrote: »

Performance reviews results may come out of the blue but as long as it's done in a formal way, then the company is actually protected.

Negative performance reviews should not come out of the blue or be a surprise to the employee. There should be well documented steps and meetings prior to the yearly review being carried out. If thats not the case, then the manager is a liability as they dont know what they are doing.

Good management involves employee performance being monitored throughout the year, identifying issues early, raising same, formally or informally with coaching in relation to problem areas with regular feedback. If things dont improve only then does it become negative that it impinges on pay related performance.

Performance reviews are meant to be objective, fair, transparent and relate to work.

If employment law did not exist we would have raft of rogue or incompetent managers doing what they wanted to do.

witchgirl26 wrote: »

The employer HR department is never concerned about protecting the employee - they're concerned with protecting the company.

They should be. Managers are also employees and bad management practices could have the company end up with the WRC or worse if procedures are not correctly followed.

witchgirl26 wrote: »

If your bonus is not guaranteed per your contract they can decide not to give it to you for any reason they want. My bonus is a non-contractual one. There is a % that is based on company returns and a % that is based on performance. However the company can decide that no bonus is being paid next year and I would have no come back on that. If it's a contractual bonus, then yes you have a case but non-contractual don't. Performance being tied into it means nothing.

We are beyond what is contractual and not contractual in this case. We have an apparent scenario described as a negative review resulting in the loss of pay without clear examples and said manager mouthing off to senior management about the employee, thrashing their reputation. That's quite serious. The employee in this case needs to read their organisations published procedures and take the matter up with their HR Department in the first instance. Otherwise their reputation will remain tarnished.

witchgirl26

STB. wrote: »

There should be procedures for performance reviews within the company.
Negative performance reviews should not come out of the blue or be a surprise to the employee. There should be well documented steps and meetings prior to the yearly review being carried out. If thats not the case, then the manager is a liability as they dont know what they are doing.

There's nothing from the original post that suggest that there isn't a procedure for performance review.

In an ideal world - no they shouldn't be a surprise but it does happen. I had weekly meetings with my manager that gave me the bad yearly performance review and nothing to the level of my review was raised during those. Was that bad, yes but those weekly meetings were not documented and the yearly one was. The organisation only required a once yearly review with all others being at managers discretion.

Good management involves employee performance being monitored throughout the year, identifying issues early, raising same, formally or informally with coaching in relation to problem areas with regular feedback. If things dont improve only then does it become negative that it impinges on pay related performance.

STB. wrote: »

Performance reviews are meant to be objective, fair, transparent and relate to work.

If employment law did not exist we would have raft of rogue or incompetent managers doing what they wanted to do.

They are - I'm not saying they shouldn't be. However one persons idea of what they're doing well differs to another. An example from my own case is when I updated a spreadsheet on a bi-daily basis (it was not a fast moving thing) and he wanted it updated daily.

STB. wrote: »

They should be. Managers are also employees and bad management practices could have the company end up with the WRC or worse if procedures are not correctly followed.

HR will still be only interested in what affects the company, not any individual within it. If management followed correct procedures in relation to the review, then there is no case for the WRC. You can't complain to them because you didn't like your review. Also the WRC would want to see that you'd exhausted your company's procedures for appealing a review prior to entertaining a case.

STB. wrote: »

We are beyond what is contractual and not contractual in this case. We have an apparent scenario described as a negative review resulting in the loss of pay without clear examples and said manager mouthing off to senior management about the employee, thrashing their reputation. That's quite serious. The employee in this case needs to read their organisations published procedures and take the matter up with their HR Department in the first instance. Otherwise their reputation will remain tarnished.

We're not if you're talking about the payment of bonus. That will still be contractual or non-contractual and getting the bad review struck from the employee record will not mean that the bonus would be paid out. The OP was advised by current manager that there's nothing they could do about the bonus part and this would be correct.

The OP says they found out they were slated to senior management but there's no evidence to suggest that the senior management believed what was said or indeed paid any attention to it.

Their reputation doesn't appear to be tarnished within the organisation though - they've received a recent very positive review from the new manager and has been given more responsibility. That would indicate that current management are not paying attention to the negative review.

The OP has been advised that they could appeal the review to HR stating that they didn't receive clear examples etc however the best time to refute the review is just after it has happened if you believe it to be unfair. 6 months and a positive review later is often too late to appeal a previous review.

_Brian

witchgirl26 wrote: »

There's nothing from the original post that suggest that there isn't a procedure for performance review.

In an ideal world - no they shouldn't be a surprise but it does happen. I had weekly meetings with my manager that gave me the bad yearly performance review and nothing to the level of my review was raised during those. Was that bad, yes but those weekly meetings were not documented and the yearly one was. The organisation only required a once yearly review with all others being at managers discretion.

Good management involves employee performance being monitored throughout the year, identifying issues early, raising same, formally or informally with coaching in relation to problem areas with regular feedback. If things dont improve only then does it become negative that it impinges on pay related performance.



They are - I'm not saying they shouldn't be. However one persons idea of what they're doing well differs to another. An example from my own case is when I updated a spreadsheet on a bi-daily basis (it was not a fast moving thing) and he wanted it updated daily.




HR will still be only interested in what affects the company, not any individual within it. If management followed correct procedures in relation to the review, then there is no case for the WRC. You can't complain to them because you didn't like your review. Also the WRC would want to see that you'd exhausted your company's procedures for appealing a review prior to entertaining a case.





We're not if you're talking about the payment of bonus. That will still be contractual or non-contractual and getting the bad review struck from the employee record will not mean that the bonus would be paid out. The OP was advised by current manager that there's nothing they could do about the bonus part and this would be correct.

The OP says they found out they were slated to senior management but there's no evidence to suggest that the senior management believed what was said or indeed paid any attention to it.

Their reputation doesn't appear to be tarnished within the organisation though - they've received a recent very positive review from the new manager and has been given more responsibility. That would indicate that current management are not paying attention to the negative review.

The OP has been advised that they could appeal the review to HR stating that they didn't receive clear examples etc however the best time to refute the review is just after it has happened if you believe it to be unfair. 6 months and a positive review later is often too late to appeal a previous review.

Company policy will have a window within which an appeal of a review is accepted. 28 days being what we used to work off, but I’ve kever heard of it going on past another review. oP accepted the poor review, shouldn’t have but did, no taksey backie at this stage I’m afraid.

looksee

Have you wondered why there is a new manager? Just move on, its unlikely the firm is going to try and untangle the mess that the old one manager may well have left.