Essential Duty Quagmire

'It's not enough that we do our best; sometimes we have to do what's required.' - Sir Winston Churchill.

I read about a company dealing with an unemployment issue a while back and had a rather rude awakening when I read the findings after a hearing to decide if a former employee would receive unemployment benefits I was flabbergasted. stunned. amazed. awed. dumb-struck. and a whole host of other terms. Basically the system said if an employee was doing their 'best' but does not meet the essential duties of a job then they are entitled to unemployment benefits if you terminate their employment because they are performing at their 'best'. It didn't matter at the amount of training given or disciplinary action taken. If the employee said they did their 'best' and misconduct couldn't be 'proven' then unemployment benefits were given.

Now I know there are those that will say that each case is unique and I sincerely hope that this is true. Whomever this investigator was totally missed the mark in evaluating the merits of this particular case. I believe Winston Churchill said it best. Sometimes our best just isn't good enough. Often employees are placed in positions that they are ill equipped to perform. Now maybe in the case above the selection process should be re-evaluated in order to make sure an applicant has the requisite abilities to perform the duties of the job prior to employment. Initial on-boarding should also help in this evaluative process and I hope a probationary period is in place at this particular company. Technically in this particular case the selection process, on-boarding, supervisory evaluation during a probation period all failed to notice the inability of this particular employee to perform the duties of the job.

I think in our current environments where many of us have been downsized, furloughed, taken on additional duties, etc. we are keenly aware of those around us who are unable to perform their jobs effectively. Unfortunately in a more robust environment we could 'help' that employee; but when we are all taking on more it's hard to give additional time to someone else when we are also struggling to perform our own duties as assigned. What's required is often much more than what is in the job description and it's our decision whether we perform well or not. Its a much different story when the duties we perform are extraordinarily more than we signed up for or if we are taking on additional duties temporarily.

No one wants to feel inadequate in their job. I believe we all innately want to do a good job. I don't think we take a position with the idea that we want to perform poorly. This is a great example of why constant feedback is great for the employee and for the company at large. Maybe the employee above would have performed optimally if feedback had been given constantly until the job was performed correctly. Winston Churchill's quote is more aspirational. Sometimes what's required becomes our best and maybe our best far outpasses what is required. Think about your current job duties. In what ways are you performing your best vs. what is required?

jamie