Caveman_Nick Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Here's the scenario: I may be told in the next day that I need to cut my staff of two to one. The why is really irrelevant. Any points that need to be made about why this might be a bad idea have been made. The Employees: 1. 68 years old. Been with the company 9-10 years. Is not directly involved in IT on a major scale, but does some IT work such as software installs. Mainly he checks the files that leave our building daily to make sure they are up to spec. His breadth of knowledge in this area is vast. He's looking to retire in 2 years. He was hired by someone else, but was consolidated into my department 8 or so years ago. Regardless of his current age, he needs to work, although he would have the benefit of collecting both unemployment and social security. 2. 30something. Been with the company 9 months. Is really just getting his training wheels off as far as our environment goes. Does mainly desktop support, but also is a back-up for me for server support and some other areas. Has been trained by employee number 1 on how to check files before they go and can do so, but with much less experience or 'vision in fixing those issues'. Was a long term employee at his last job, but left that company to come here because the environment was becoming unstable. If I needed back-up, it would have to be outsourced. He has a much better chance to finding gainful employment if I let him go. My options are: keep employee #1 and let go of employee #2. In that case I absorb all of employee #2's responsibilities and someone in another department becomes the back-up for employee #1. OR I can keep employee #2 and help him grow into what employee #1 is. This would be somewhat of a career path change for him, because he is on an IT track. He would become more of a jack of all trades. He would take over Employee #1's duties, backed up by someone in another department. I would absorb most of Employee #2's duties, but he would still be available to back me up as needed Both employees are loyal and competent. Employee #1 has much more skill than Employee #2, but Employee #2 has much more upside and potential longevity. What would you do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Ouch...tough decisions like this always suck. My vote goes to the higher tenured employee, coupled with the fact he retires in 2 years. A 30yr old can find a job much easier than a 68yr old close to retirement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABearWithFurniture Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Keep your tenured guy...30 yr. old IT guys are plentiful and in 2 years when your guy retires you should be able to find a replacement easy enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Based on the info you have given, I would keep the tenured guy. IT is a popular major, so a replacement probably wont be that difficult to find in 2 years. Add in the moral question of eliminating basically an un-hireable guy in the 68 year old. It sounds like the learning curve for keeping the younger guy would be pretty steep, and the value in the older guy is in direct operations versus a "fall back" that the 2nd guy can provide. So as I read it, you get better day to day operations but lose potential backup in case things go wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I'd have to agree with the others, keep the best worker which is the older worker. Be glad you are not just told to cut the more expensive guy. Keeping the older guy may not be helpful to you 2 years from now, but then again the young guy may have left by then anyway. Keep the one with the most knowledge and just be glad they didn't force you to go with cheaper and less experienced workers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky11 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 agree with above - keep longest tenured guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Tough one. And precisely why I got out of management. So there is no way to offer the old dude early retirement? Win-win there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted February 3, 2011 Author Share Posted February 3, 2011 I'd have to agree with the others, keep the best worker which is the older worker. Be glad you are not just told to cut the more expensive guy. Keeping the older guy may not be helpful to you 2 years from now, but then again the young guy may have left by then anyway. Keep the one with the most knowledge and just be glad they didn't force you to go with cheaper and less experienced workers. That might happen. I'd have less weight on my shoulders then, because the decision would have been taken from my hands. It's not yet a foregone conclusion yet that I will have to cut either guy, but it's highly likely. Tough one. And precisely why I got out of management. So there is no way to offer the old dude early retirement? Win-win there. I am not sure that we offer any kind of retirement package, but the 'upside' for the older guy is that he could collect until his intended retirement age of 70. Doesn't make me feel better about it. The worst part about letting the 30something guy go is that he left another job to take this one. It's not like I picked him up off the street, but it sounds like I might end up putting him there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 (edited) First of all it shouldn't matter if the older guy can collect unemployment or SS. You are not in the business of being nice, or being a humanitarian. You are in business to get the job done. Still if you want to think nice thoughts the older guy can also get medicare. I see you have two choices. A. You keep the younger guy. He knows what the older guy does, and he can do it, though he isn't as proficient at this point. He can grow into it. Additionally he can back you up which to me would seem like a good thing. More than likely the younger guy's salary is lower due to him not being with the company as long, so you'd probably be saving your company money which your boss will probably like. Additionally it sounds like the younger guy has a broader range, which would help since you now have two people doing what three used to do. B. Keep the older guy. This might be a little easier on you for the first two years, but then again it might not, because it sounds like while he is very good at his narrow job description he is rather limited. Additionally in two years he will retire, so then you have to train someone that doesn't know a thing about how y'all do things. This is really a no brainer from a business standpoint. You have to keep the younger guy. Sure the mushy feely people here will say keep the old guy because he may not be able to get hired elsewhere, but you manage a part of a business, not a charity. Edited February 3, 2011 by Perchoutofwater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 As long as the production is similar, I always used tenure as the next factor, mainly because I didn't want others under my watch to get the idea that their hard work and loyalty really doesn't matter in the end. It doesn't sound like it is quite the same in your situation, since there aren't others in your department that this type of message could reach. That is really the only part of management that I don't miss. Luckily, I was mostly dealing with guys that were under 25, but dealing with watching an 18-year old kid cry because he lost his job still sucks. I'm not sure I could handle watching a 68 year old cry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted February 3, 2011 Author Share Posted February 3, 2011 First of all it shouldn't matter if the older guy can collect unemployment or SS. You are not in the business of being nice, or being a humanitarian. You are in business to get the job done. Still if you want to think nice thoughts the older guy can also get medicare. I see you have two choices. A. You keep the younger guy. He knows what the older guy does, and he can do it, though he isn't as proficient at this point. He can grow into it. Additionally he can back you up which to me would seem like a good thing. More than likely the younger guy's salary is lower due to him not being with the company as long, so you'd probably be saving your company money which your boss will probably like. Additionally it sounds like the younger guy has a broader range, which would help since you now have two people doing what three used to do. B. Keep the older guy. This might be a little easier on you for the first two years, but then again it might not, because it sounds like while he is very good at his narrow job description he is rather limited. Additionally in two years he will retire, so then you have to train someone that doesn't know a thing about how y'all do things. This is really a no brainer from a business standpoint. You have to keep the younger guy. Sure the mushy feely people here will say keep the old guy because he may not be able to get hired elsewhere, but you manage a part of a business, not a charity. Yeah...it shouldn't matter. It does though. These are people, and people I know, like and respect. But, I will make the best decision from a professional standpoint. The rest of it is just mush that goes with the negative feelings surrounding this issue. And frankly, I agree with you that keeping the younger guy is better for the company overall. Your assessment of the 2 situations is spot on IMO. It still doesn't hurt to gain some opinions and perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 This is really a no brainer from a business standpoint. You have to keep the younger guy. Sure the mushy feely people here will say keep the old guy because he may not be able to get hired elsewhere, but you manage a part of a business, not a charity. Wow, I actually agree with Perch, for many reasons: younger guys likely makes less, can work harder and longer, can be a staple in your company's growth for years to come. maybe most importantly, it will show your higher-ups that you have the ability to make a tough decision without letting emotions play a part. You'll be saving the company money, keeping the better worker, and you'll prove to them that you are indeed management materiel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riffraff Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Anothr point of view is that the 68 year old isn't in line to take your position. The 30-something makes a fine back-up, err makes you expendible with 6 months grooming. Business can be cruel like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 (edited) It sounds like the younger guy would take on a lot more responsibilities outside of what he does now. Is there any risk that he might not want to do what the older guy does? The last thing you want to do is let the older guy go and have the younger guy leave within a few months of the change because he doesn't like the new direction of his position. ETA - It sounds like there is virtually no risk that the older guy leaves your company within the next two years, and who knows he might not retire in two years... It sounds like there is some risk, though maybe not substantial, of the younger guy leaving your company within the next two years since his history says that he is willing to do that and his field is one in which the opportunity for something bigger and better might come along. Edited February 3, 2011 by MTSuper7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted February 3, 2011 Author Share Posted February 3, 2011 Anothr point of view is that the 68 year old isn't in line to take your position. The 30-something makes a fine back-up, err makes you expendible with 6 months grooming. Business can be cruel like that. My position is as safe as the company. If the company is in business, I have my job if I want it. It's not even a consideration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Nothing matters except money. You always fire the guy making the most money. Nothing else needs to be taken into consideration. Loyalty, tenure, job knowledge, none of that counts compared to saving your company a couple of bucks. The bottom line is all that matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Yeah...it shouldn't matter. It does though. These are people, and people I know, like and respect. But, I will make the best decision from a professional standpoint. The rest of it is just mush that goes with the negative feelings surrounding this issue. And frankly, I agree with you that keeping the younger guy is better for the company overall. Your assessment of the 2 situations is spot on IMO. It still doesn't hurt to gain some opinions and perspective. Don't get me wrong, I'd feel bad about it as well, but you have to do what is best for the company. I hate firing people, but it's part of the job. Look on the bright side, like you said the older guy can collect unemployment for the two years that he would have worked anyway, he can also collect SS, but more importantly he qualifies for medicare, so it won't be like he is out there with no insurance. Honestly with unemployment as high as it is right now, the young guy might have a harder time of it that the older guy, because he doesn't qualify for medicare and SS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Fire them both and hire some hot 22 yo chick with a nice rack. Or, I'd keep the old guy, for more than one reason. Though, if you do keep the old guy, realize he's gonna be gone in a couple of years, you'll have to retrain someone at some point. Though, younger people are more likely to jump from opportunity to opportunity, so either way, you probably will have to train a new employee in two years. So, go ahead and hire the aforementioned hot chick and train her now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ts Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 This would / should be your HR department's headache (if you have one) but any impact on the decision from the tenured employee potentially being in an age protected class under ADEA legislation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Your avatar is just simply outstanding...I need a link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 [TimC] In Star Trek TNG Season 7, Episode 16 titled Thine Own Self; Counselor Troi is taking the bridge officer's test in order to try to become a Commander. The lesson she needed to learn that Ricker finally conveyed was that a Commander's first duty is to the ship. Eventually she passed the test after she ordered a hologram LaForge to his death in order to save the ship. [/TimC] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Honestly with unemployment as high as it is right now, the young guy might have a harder time of it that the older guy, because he doesn't qualify for medicare and SS. This...and the fact that the 30-year-old guy will be competing with, literally, hundreds of other 30-year-olds for work. But it all boils down to this.....a good leader surrounds himself with good people. Pick the guy that will enable you to excel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 (edited) Nevermind I'm not in management. Edited February 3, 2011 by tazinib1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Nothing matters except money. You always fire the guy making the most money. Nothing else needs to be taken into consideration. Loyalty, tenure, job knowledge, none of that counts compared to saving your company a couple of bucks. The bottom line is all that matters. I haven't been around the boards much today, so maybe my huddle-meter is off a bit, but this has to be a fishing trip, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 [TimC] In Star Trek TNG Season 7, Episode 16 titled Thine Own Self; Counselor Troi is taking the bridge officer's test in order to try to become a Commander. The lesson she needed to learn that Ricker finally conveyed was that a Commander's first duty is to the ship. Eventually she passed the test after she ordered a hologram LaForge to his death in order to save the ship. [/TimC] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.