A reader writes:
My department had a manager, Beth, who spiraled into a drug addiction crisis post-Covid. The details of how that happened and how long it took to remove her from her position could make up several letters, but I will leave out those details as it’s not what I’m writing about now.
Beth’s team did their jobs (or did not do their jobs) while their boss was in the midst of this crisis for close to two years. Now Beth is gone and the team is in chaos. After she left, it became clear that over this period Beth was not checking that anyone was actually doing any work. She ignored almost all emails expressing concerns about her team. She also approved many hours of late night overtime, during which it is very unlikely any work was actually being done. Some new people joined the team during this time and got essentially no training, so have been just making it up as they go along, with no one checking in. Like I said, chaos.
Beth’s director, Janet, has decided that instead of going back two years and trying to pick apart this web of problems, most of which cannot be proven at this point, they are just going to start fresh. People are now held to working the right schedule, they’re no longer allowed to clock overtime without prior approval, and customers are getting served appropriately.
The problem is that there is a handful of employees who are VERY angry over this issue. These are employees that did everything “right” over the last two years and are very upset there are no consequences for those that didn’t. My impression is that these are great workers who got so fed up during this time that they can barely stand to be in the same room as the people who took advantage of their manager’s breakdown to not do their jobs. These “good” employees are so hostile that it’s a terrible work environment for everyone.
I feel bad because I know that under a different manager, this ball of hate would not have developed. These employees have been around for years and I know under their previous manager they flourished. I am not directly involved in this situation at all, but I am currently training Beth’s replacement and have shared the same details I‘ve shared here with you, and I’m not sure whether there are any further tips I could give them. Any advice would be much appreciated!
I mean, it is pretty unfair. It’s understandable that people are upset. Apparently they too could have kicked back for two years, not done any work, gotten paid for overtime they didn’t work, and in the end received no consequences for it. It makes sense that they’re irritated. I’d also bet that they ended up picking up the slack for their lazier coworkers during that time, and now they’re not being recognized for it.
I’m not saying Janet’s solution is the wrong one. Maybe there’s no practical way to sort through what happened, and maybe just moving forward is what truly makes the most sense for the business. But it’s unrealistic to expect people won’t have feelings about that.
I do wonder if there’s no way to reward the better employees now. If there’s any way to tell who kept the department afloat during that time or went above and beyond to cover for others, ideally they’d be recognized in some way — a bonus, better positioning for future promotions, whatever it is. Instead of looking at it as “give consequences for people who slacked off,” the right lens might be “reward those who didn’t.” But I also realize there might be no practical way to do that at this point — or no practical way to do it without missing some people, which would risk demoralizing them even further.
It’s going to be particularly tough for Beth’s replacement — who sounds like she’s coming in new to the situation — to sort through all that, even though she’s stuck dealing with the aftermath. In her shoes, I think I’d do a couple of things: First, talk one-on-one with each team member about their sense of how things are going and what the top priorities for stabilizing the department should be and, as part of those conversations, create room for them to air any grievances or frustrations. She should be open to hearing them out, while also being clear about what they can and can’t expect going forward. If it’s clear that someone was instrumental in keeping the department functioning during Beth’s chaotic reign, she should be openly appreciative of that and say that going forward she’ll be rewarding that kind of initiative/responsibility/effort (assuming that’s true, which it should be). She can’t go back and retroactively manage a situation she wasn’t there for, but she can assure them that the team will be managed effectively from this point on, which includes recognizing good work and addressing problems forthrightly.
That might not be enough for some people, but that’s the piece that’s within her control. And from there, it’s reasonable to hold everyone to a basic expectation that they will operate professionally. They’re allowed to feel demoralized or discouraged (what happened was demoralizing and discouraging), but they do need to work civilly with colleagues. If they don’t do that, she’ll need to have some hard conversations with people about the reality of the situation — yes, things were mishandled in the past … we don’t have a way to undo that now … we’ve got to move forward and that includes being civil and professional even to people you’re unhappy with … and we’re at the point where you’ve got to figure out whether you can do that or not because we are moving forward.
But it’s also very likely that as she gets to know the team better, she’ll get a good feel for who slacked off over the last two years and who didn’t. Chances are good that those same tendencies will show up in their work now, just perhaps in less dramatic ways, and she should watch for opportunities to reward the people who carried things.
All that said, unless you’re senior to Beth’s replacement, I don’t know if it’s your place to give this sort of advice to her. But this is what I’d tell her if I could.
