A question about a "rogue" staff member in my group

[research_prof]

Folks,

I hired a staff research member last August (kind of postdoc/research scientist-like position) in my group. Part of the reason was that I had too much money that would expire in a year if I did not use it and another part was that I have many PhD/MS students, so I needed a bit of help with their day-to-day supervision in order to create some time for myself to write more proposals and do my research. I have been an Assistant Prof. for a few years at this point, but I am quite young to be a faculty member (most of the folks I know around my age are still PhD students). I also look even younger than that (my grandma says I still look like a high school student). My staff research member is probably 10 years older than me. I have absolutely no age bias and that's why I hired this person in the first place without any consideration of his age, but let's keep that in mind because it might be relevant for our story below.

So, this person came with an 1-year appointment (from outside the US with his entire family) and I mentioned to him that assuming he performs well and that he is able to help us secure additional funding, I will consider renewing his appointment for another year.

Fast forward to three and a half months later, this person's performance is really poor and his overall attitude is even worse. A few examples:

- Every time we meet, instead of mostly talking about work, he keeps bringing up all the issues he is facing with personal stuff (e.g., with his kids being sick), the fact that the money we are paying him is not enough for his family to make a living (we negotiated his salary of course before giving him an offer and he also chose to bring his entire family with him), his immigration situation (it looks like he started trying to immigrate to the US after we gave him an offer), and also the duration of his appointment (which I made clear from the beginning that it will be for 1 year and I will consider to renew it depending upon his performance and funding availability).
- He somehow expects me to be able to "fix" all these issues for him or at least this is the sense I have gotten (and he is kind of putting pressure on me indirectly to do so).
- His work performance is rather poor. I asked him to help a weak PhD student of mine with his paper and the paper became even worse after his "assistance". I eventually had to rewrite the whole paper on my own. I asked him to write a 2-page pre proposal (after sending him an example pre-proposal I had written last year for the same funding program). After 3 months, I am still waiting for him to do that. I asked him to write another 2-page pre-proposal. He "finished" it 3 days before the deadline and he sent it to me. It was so poorly written that I had to rewrite the whole thing 3 days before the deadline. I asked him to write a paper. He wrote it, but the quality was so bad that I was ashamed to be a co-author.
- He does many "small" things that if someone looks at them one by one in isolation, they look kind of accidental. However, if you look at them all together they kind of "tell' a story. For example, he is an hourly university employee that will be working 40 hours per week. He has been submitting all his hours to me for approval even before he actually works these hours and he just submitted a timesheet to me claiming that today he worked 9 hours (not 8). I find hard to believe that given that he is so unproductive. However, this kind of tells a story to me given his complaints about pay, about immigration lawyers being so expensive, and day-care for his kids being so expensive.

In other words: I hired him hoping that he will "save" me some time, but he has been putting more stuff in my plate. Now about the age difference I talked to you about above: I feel he believes that because I am much younger than me, I will not have the guts to push back on all the crap he is doing. However, I am surprised because everyone at my institution knows at this point that my tolerance for BS in general is very low (if not zero at all). I would like some feedback in terms of how to handle things. I see a few alternatives:

1. I make clear to him who is a subordinate of whom. I am happy to do that if that's what needs to be done, since my gut feeling is he thinks I am just a kid and that he can be my "boss".
2. I document everything and let him go. His employment is at-will, so he can be let go at any point in time without a reason.
3. I keep trying to work with him until his appointment is over.

Any thoughts?

PS: I am absolutely ok with my group members asking for help when they need it, but when they actually try to contribute to the welfare and success of the group. I am not ok with groups members simply asking for stuff without having contributed (or showing any intention to contribute) to the welfare of the group.

[Hegemony]

I doubt that he is writing badly just because he thinks he can get away with it because of your perceived youth. I'd guess that he is writing badly because he's a poor writer.

Teaching someone to write well is labor-intensive and not usually very successful unless the person is motivated, and this guy doesn't sound very motivated. Are there things he can do that would save you time and help your lab? Redirect him onto those things.

I think you'd be better off ignoring why he may be doing these things — it could be lack of respect because of the age issue, it could be that he's a guy with poor work habits, it could be that he's under too much stress to think properly, or whatever. The why is not really relevant. You need him to be more effective and helpful for your lab. Here is where you need to step up and be a more effective and useful boss. if he starts to gripe about childcare, immigration lawyers, and so on, you say "Those are issues for another time, and I doubt that I'm the right person to address about those things. Right now we need to focus on what needs to happen in the lab for the next week. Now, Jason and Sally need to finish the X project, so you will need to..." If he interrupts with griping off topic, redirect again. If he keeps interrupting and going off topic, you can say something about the overall situation like "To succeed at this position, you will need to focus on the tasks that need to be done. Right now we're discussing task Y. We need to keep that focus in order to make the lab run smoothly. This is not the time to talk about other issues. Can I rely on you to keep the focus here?" And if he protests, "To be clear, to stay in this job you will need to keep your focus on accomplishing our tasks."

I think course correction like this is in order before you consider letting him go. Look up how to do a PIP (Performance Improvement Plan). Make sure you are doing your side of it correctly — giving him clear directions, especially.

You might benefit from reading Ask-A-Manager about PIPs and managing poor employees: https://www.askamanager.org/. Do a search under the relevant terms.

[bacardiandlime]

If his work is really sub par, look into firing him now (before you get to the job-renewal debate, which this guy will make more difficult).
You hired someone to make your job easier, not create more work for you.

[clean]

If the hire was made in August, we are about the 90 to 100 day range, depending on When in August he was hired, and arrived.  Have a 90/100 day review.
Provide him with the list you provided and let him know that you will need to see improvement and that you will meet again in 30 days  to review his performance again. 

You may want to use more of your time to visit with HR and have a talk with them.  While you can not fix his family or immigration status problems, you may not be able to mention anything about them.  I doubt that you would, so ask HR about how to answer the question 'What are some examples of how I am distracted at work?'

But do use the poor writing, and the time issues as examples poor performance. 

[Hibush]

This situation has a lot of familiar elements. In short, you and the postdoc don't have enough common interest to make the situation work. You need to get together with your human-resources division and international-scholars division to really understand the potential outcomes and the processes that lead to those outcomes. The specifics vary by schools and to some extent by the particular person in key roles.

One possibility is that the person is 95% focused on getting a permanent-residency visa for himself and his family. You were expecting an independent scientist focused on advancing their career. The different foci can lead to lots of misinterpretation. This level of desperation happens with academics just as it does with the poor victims of human trafficking who get sold a bill of goods only to get dumped at the US border in Mexico. In the places of emigration, the postdoc's narrative can be so obvious that it is expected that everyone else is in on the game. Are the actions from your initial contact consistent with immigration being the primary goal? The situation in some places is terrible, so some sympathy is in order. On the other hand, you are not the solution to that problem.

Regardless of the reason for the performance, you will have to calibrate the assignments to what the postdoc is actually capable of doing and willing to do. That will take considerable exploration. Once the exploration is done, you will likely need a lot of structure and specificity to the assignments.

If you do have to refill the position, use your network to get a referral if you can. Your disciplinary colleagues are much less likely to send you a problem. Especially if your position is a good professional opportunity for someone in a complementary situation.

[Caracal]

- He does many "small" things that if someone looks at them one by one in isolation, they look kind of accidental. However, if you look at them all together they kind of "tell' a story. For example, he is an hourly university employee that will be working 40 hours per week. He has been submitting all his hours to me for approval even before he actually works these hours and he just submitted a timesheet to me claiming that today he worked 9 hours (not 8). I find hard to believe that given that he is so unproductive. However, this kind of tells a story to me given his complaints about pay, about immigration lawyers being so expensive, and day-care for his kids being so expensive.

I know this is the "small" stuff, but is he being paid by the hour in the sense that he is only supposed to get paid for the hours he actually works, or is he paid by the hour in a notional sense. You mention that you negotiated a salary with him, so it sounds like it's more the latter? I assume he's not supposed to get any overtime? Isn't there usually just a tacit understanding with these things that you aren't really expecting him to work exactly 40 hours every week and the time cards are just an administrative thing?

[mamselle]

Practicality infused with compassion.

M.

[research_prof]

Thank you, all. I think I will start with a discussion with him to explain that he cannot just be asking for stuff without producing anything. I will also mention his poor time management and poor performance issues and ask him to show improvement in the next 30 days. I will remind him that his employment is at will and I will make clear that I will not be approving overtime employment for him (beyond 8 hours per day). I will document everything and send these notes to him over email too. And yes, I have explained to him that his 8 hours of employment is just a technicality and he is supposed to work until the work is done (paid by the hour in a notional sense).

I have worked so hard to secure this funding and I was hoping to find someone who can contribute to the welfare of my group. It seems like I hired someone that only cares about himself. Yes, he comes from a poor country, but this is not an excuse to only care about his pay and immigration. At the end of the day, he negotiated a specific salary, a certain duration of employment, and a certain visa status. That's exactly what he eventually got and I do not intend to change any of that after the fact no matter how hard he might try. I was also an international student coming from a poor country, but for over 3 years, I did not ask anything from my advisor. I wanted to first contribute and then ask. At least, that's how my parents have raised me.

PS: Oh, he mentioned to me the other day that he needs to start applying to other jobs because I gave him only 1 year of employment. Even the way he puts things feels like he is trying to blame me for everything. Well, guess what... I can relieve him from having such a "bad" boss like me by letting him go... The at will clause in his job offer that HR put might end up being a blessing in this situation.

[mamselle]

Some of the confusion may be perceptual: there are international students who come back, talk about how their school did all kinds of things for them, and so blur the expectations of those who follow.

The US is often seen as the 'final goal,' in which once you're here, you're home free--so he may have been negotiating with stars in his eyes (or even flawed English skills) and interpreted everything from that perspective.

Not saying that's a free pass for sloughing off--it's not‐- but the "Come-Jesus" talk you propose might need to include a clarification on that.

M.

[research_prof]

@M: I also believed this might be the case at the beginning, but he has already clarified that he was very well aware of the specifics of his appointment and visa status from the moment he got the offer. So he is not naive, but rather sneaky and dishonest at this point.

Some of the confusion may be perceptual: there are international students who come back, talk about how their school did all kinds of things for them, and so blur the expectations of those who follow.

The US is often seen as the 'final goal,' in which once you're here, you're home free--so he may have been negotiating with stars in his eyes (or even flawed English skills) and interpreted everything from that perspective.

Not saying that's a free pass for sloughing off--it's not‐- but the "Come-Jesus" talk you propose might need to include a clarification on that.

M.

[hazelshade]

I'm really confused by what's going on here. Is this staff member being paid hourly, or is he being paid a salary? You mention that you won't pay him overtime and that he needs to work until the work is done--but if he's being paid hourly, you need to pay him for the time he has worked, full stop. You absolutely cannot require him to work hours for which he is not being paid.

[Caracal]

I'm really confused by what's going on here. Is this staff member being paid hourly, or is he being paid a salary? You mention that you won't pay him overtime and that he needs to work until the work is done--but if he's being paid hourly, you need to pay him for the time he has worked, full stop. You absolutely cannot require him to work hours for which he is not being paid.

It sounds like this job is hourly because of administrative reasons, but, like most academic jobs, it doesn't fit particularly well that context. On a practical level, you don't want to be docking the guys pay for the week because everything wrapped up at 4 on Friday and he went home early leaving him at 39 hours for the week, or telling him he has to leave at 430 on Friday when he's trying to finish some things up, because he came in early on Monday and he'd be over 40 hours.

I do think that given the nature of the job he is doing, forty hours a week is probably a reasonable ballpark expectation and you should be making sure you aren't expecting him to do more than that on a regular basis. If he's submitting time cards with overtime, I would start by seeing if this is just a misunderstanding or if he feels overburdened.

[hazelshade]

My sense is that it's relatively uncommon for jobs like this to be hourly--usually they're salaried, exempt positions where overtime wouldn't come into play. (I'd wondered if the comments about hours worked derived from time and effort discussions rather than actual pay structure.) A position like this should definitely pay above the FLSA minimum for exempt status (I mention this because the FLSA exemption limit can be one of those administrative oddities that affects how positions are classified). If the staff member is actually hourly, though, it would be considered wage theft to require him to work hours he's not being paid for. This puts your institution at risk of being fined; depending on what state you're in (some states have dramatically beefed up their wage theft laws recently), there can be very steep fines and prison time involved. You really can't mess around with this--get on the same page with your HR team.

More generally, if you want to solve this problem, you're going to have to actually manage the employee. (It's possible you've been providing guidance and feedback in a helpful way, but this is not at all evident in the account you've provided.) I strongly second Hegemony's advice about putting together a PIP plan (and I'd add that you should consult with HR about how best to do this). You need to make sure you're covering your butt here both legally (as someone who's hired and fired employees in an at-will state, let me assure you that at-will employment does not provide as much latitude for employers as your account suggests!) and reputationally (abruptly firing this guy without making a discernible effort to address the problem is not going to make you look like a good mentor and supportive employer to other people in your group or your institution).