Last year we looked at how to make a good hire and induct the person into the business successfully. We also talked about how important first impressions are during the interview process and when the person first starts at your company, so that the new recruit settles in quickly and feels wanted. Now we have to ensure that they perform.
In this edition I will look at how best to use the probationary period, and I'll explore retaining staff in future issues.
Employee Rights Within The Probationary Period:
Employers normally operate a three- to six-month probationary period for a new employee, before the person is confirmed as a full member of staff. This is the period for you, the employer, to decide that you have made the right decision and for the new employee to do the same.
During the probation period the new employee is afforded the same rights as the existing employees. However, if you decide to let the probationer go during this period then they are only due the specified notice period applicable to their probation, which is usually a week rather than a month. Unfair dismissal cannot be claimed unless the reason is for harassment or some form of discrimination. (If the the probationary period has lasted longer than a year then you would have to go through the statutory dismissal process.)
It's A Two-Way Street:
A probationary period allows you, the employer to ensure that what was promised in the interview is delivered by the new employee. It also means that, provided you act sensibly, you can let the person go if the person isn’t working out without having to carry out the usual two- or three-stage warning procedure.
If you are generally happy with the performance of the new employee but continue to have a few concerns at the end of a probationary period, then the probation can be extended via a review on or before the end of the first period. You will also need to provide a follow-up in writing, detailing the period of the extension and the areas which require improvement.
It is also a fact that a new hire is most likely to leave within six months of joining you. This means that you have to look after the new employee!
It is important to realise that probationary periods are two way and if the conditions promised by you in the interview don’t materialise then your new member of staff could leave on minimal notice and you'll have to go through the hiring process again, with little or no tangible gain from the first recruit during the short time they worked for you.
In short, always remember that the probationary period is an important time for all parties.
How To Ensure That The Relationship Works:
When somebody new starts it is fair to say that they will need guidance even if they have carried out a similar role at a previous employer because no two working environments are the same.
Therefore, you or someone who you trust and understands the role to be carried out should show the person how the tasks are carried out in your organisation.
Your role, or that of the team leader or HR, is to review progress regularly with the new employee so they understand how they are progressing - with praise where they have performed well and explanation as to where improvement is needed. This will allow you to pinpoint any training needs to ensure that role is carried out satisfactorily in the future and it also allows the new employee to air any concerns.
After each review it is useful to document the progress in your own records and in writing to the new employee. This avoids ambiguity, provides motivation if the employee is doing well and clarity on what is required. It can also be useful if a grievance is lodged at a later time, or as an evidentiary trail if you feel you either have to extend the probation period or terminate the employment during or at the end of the probation period.
The Dangers:
This may all seem straightforward, but in the work environment there are always lots of pulls on a manager's time and it is all too easy to overlook the activities which will ensure that you are on keeping on top of a new employee's performance and showing them that you care and are trying to help them be successful. As a result, the new employee frequently receives attention in the first week or two and is then more-or-less ignored. By the time they are formally reviewed towards the end of the probationary period they can have established working patterns which may not be acceptable or their morale is low and retaining them will prove a real challenge.
In Summary:
Used correctly, the probationary period is an excellent tool to ensure that the new employee is performing in the way you want and is motivated, committed and happy working with you and your organisation. It allows you to be fair and highlight areas which require improvement, and it provides time and scope for the new employee to improve in those areas. The result should be that at the end of the period, the decision to continue or not is easy and, indeed, obvious for both parties.
Next Time:
In the next edition I will look at how to conduct employee reviews in a manner which is effective but not overly time consuming, so that they are easy to fit around your existing work schedule.
THE REALITIES OF THE EQUALITY ACT
Firstly, happy New Year to you all and I hope 2011 turns out to be highly successful..
What is the Equality Act?
The Equality Act provides a legislative framework to protect the rights of individuals and provide equality of opportunity for all. The Act has updated and simplified previous legislation and delivers a simple, modern and accessible framework of discrimination law which protects individuals from unfair treatment and promotes a fair and more equal society.
Most of the provisions came into force in the UK on 1st October 2010 and replace a number of pieces of legislation such as the Race Relations Act of 1976 and the Disability Discrimination Act of 1985 so that fair working measures are basically combined under one act.
The legislation now covers the following areas, where discrimination is based on:
There are many new definitions of discrimination which as an employer you definitely need to be aware of such as:
The purpose of this article is to look at the implications from a hiring perspective rather than the overall implications but, an excellent overview of the implications of the Act can be found on the ACAS website on the link below:
http://www.acas.org.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=2833&p=0
Health Screening:
What I want to look at today is the affects that the Act will have on hiring and how to deal with them.
The main outcome of the Act is that, barring certain exceptions detailed below, employers will not be able to ask pre-employment questions. Employers will be able to ask medical questions or ask applicants to take a medical assessment after an offer has been made but only so that adjustments can be made to accommodate the new employee.
The Exceptions:
So what does this mean?
The main point is that asking the questions is not discriminatory but acting on the responses could be discriminatory and allow unsuccessful applicants to submit a claim to the employment tribunal. The burden is then on the employer to demonstrate that there was no discrimination and why another applicant was offered the role or that the claimant wasn’t considered right because of qualification and ability to carry out the role.
In today’s litigious society this can put great pressure on employers and means changing the way you hire.
From a practical point of view I am sure we are all totally against discrimination and the Act is very positive in this way. We only have to look at our own workforces, however, to realise that some people take lots of time off for various illnesses whilst others take minimal or no time off.
Sometimes people taking lots of time off goes back to the employer’s business environment being negative and not motivational so staff are more likely to take time off for minor situations. Sometimes, however, there are people who just don’t care and create an additional work load for the rest of the team due to their unreliability. As a potential employer I would want to establish this and under the new legislation would find it very difficult.
The likely outcome is that if employers have an inkling that someone has illnesses, etc., (good interviewers develop a good gut feel) then rather than asking questions to establish the true situation, they will carry out the interview without asking and find other reasons which could easily be documented as to why they did not make the hire.
The act could then be counter productive in terms of employers not wanting to take risks when they cannot verify someone’s health. So, applicants could be discriminated against more easily and the savvy employer with good interview notes would be able to provide plenty of justification for not making an offer or hire. On top of this there would be no obvious grounds for the applicant to go to a tribunal because there were no signs of discrimination.
In summary, the Act is sensible but by moving too far to protect the applicants could actually act against them.
A Small Addendum regarding The Apprentice series which finished in December in the UK.
A little late but anybody who watched the week in December when the candidates were interviewed will have learned exactly how not to interview someone.
Many of the questions were dubious, at best, under the new Equality Legislation, and were insulting for the candidates for the high profile role. If these techniques were applied in a real environment I am confident the candidate would decline the opportunity. The methodology I have been demonstrating may not make such an interesting television programme but it is effective and keeps the candidate onside.
We will be back soon with more hints and tips on how to make the best hires and retain the best staff.
What is the Equality Act?
The Equality Act provides a legislative framework to protect the rights of individuals and provide equality of opportunity for all. The Act has updated and simplified previous legislation and delivers a simple, modern and accessible framework of discrimination law which protects individuals from unfair treatment and promotes a fair and more equal society.
Most of the provisions came into force in the UK on 1st October 2010 and replace a number of pieces of legislation such as the Race Relations Act of 1976 and the Disability Discrimination Act of 1985 so that fair working measures are basically combined under one act.
The legislation now covers the following areas, where discrimination is based on:
- Pregnancy and maternity,
- sexual orientation,
- sex,
- religion or belief,
- race,
- gender reassignment,
- disability and age.
There are many new definitions of discrimination which as an employer you definitely need to be aware of such as:
- discrimination by association,
- perception discrimination, and
- indirect discrimination.
The purpose of this article is to look at the implications from a hiring perspective rather than the overall implications but, an excellent overview of the implications of the Act can be found on the ACAS website on the link below:
http://www.acas.org.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=2833&p=0
Health Screening:
What I want to look at today is the affects that the Act will have on hiring and how to deal with them.
The main outcome of the Act is that, barring certain exceptions detailed below, employers will not be able to ask pre-employment questions. Employers will be able to ask medical questions or ask applicants to take a medical assessment after an offer has been made but only so that adjustments can be made to accommodate the new employee.
The Exceptions:
- To find out whether the applicant can comply with a work requirement or the interview.
- To find out if the employer has to make reasonable changes to allow the interview to go ahead.
- To find out whether the applicant can carry out a function required for the role.
- To monitor diversity within the applicants.
- If a role requires a person with a disability, to establish that the applicant has the disability.
- To take positive action to enable disabled people to overcome a disadvantage.
- To vet applicants in relation to national security.
So what does this mean?
The main point is that asking the questions is not discriminatory but acting on the responses could be discriminatory and allow unsuccessful applicants to submit a claim to the employment tribunal. The burden is then on the employer to demonstrate that there was no discrimination and why another applicant was offered the role or that the claimant wasn’t considered right because of qualification and ability to carry out the role.
In today’s litigious society this can put great pressure on employers and means changing the way you hire.
From a practical point of view I am sure we are all totally against discrimination and the Act is very positive in this way. We only have to look at our own workforces, however, to realise that some people take lots of time off for various illnesses whilst others take minimal or no time off.
Sometimes people taking lots of time off goes back to the employer’s business environment being negative and not motivational so staff are more likely to take time off for minor situations. Sometimes, however, there are people who just don’t care and create an additional work load for the rest of the team due to their unreliability. As a potential employer I would want to establish this and under the new legislation would find it very difficult.
The likely outcome is that if employers have an inkling that someone has illnesses, etc., (good interviewers develop a good gut feel) then rather than asking questions to establish the true situation, they will carry out the interview without asking and find other reasons which could easily be documented as to why they did not make the hire.
The act could then be counter productive in terms of employers not wanting to take risks when they cannot verify someone’s health. So, applicants could be discriminated against more easily and the savvy employer with good interview notes would be able to provide plenty of justification for not making an offer or hire. On top of this there would be no obvious grounds for the applicant to go to a tribunal because there were no signs of discrimination.
In summary, the Act is sensible but by moving too far to protect the applicants could actually act against them.
A Small Addendum regarding The Apprentice series which finished in December in the UK.
A little late but anybody who watched the week in December when the candidates were interviewed will have learned exactly how not to interview someone.
Many of the questions were dubious, at best, under the new Equality Legislation, and were insulting for the candidates for the high profile role. If these techniques were applied in a real environment I am confident the candidate would decline the opportunity. The methodology I have been demonstrating may not make such an interesting television programme but it is effective and keeps the candidate onside.
We will be back soon with more hints and tips on how to make the best hires and retain the best staff.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)