Mixing
Who should be present at a salary review? [closed]
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I work at a small start up, and recently asked to have a salary review. I set up the meeting with the CFO, and asked that my project manager and supervisor be present as well. The CFO responded by stating that these meetings are confidential, that there is no point in having anyone else present, and that the other parties can send their recommendations / input before the review.
Is it standard to only have a 1:1 salary review, or to include these other parties?
Having them present would definitely strengthen my case, and I feel like the CFO is purposefully trying to avoid that.
salary negotiation performance-reviews
asked Apr 14 '15 at 15:45
VLab
91
closed as off-topic by gnat, Michael Grubey, Chris E, Jenny D, yochannah Apr 19 '15 at 12:11
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – gnat, Michael Grubey, Chris E, Jenny D, yochannah
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I work at a small start up, and recently asked to have a salary review. I set up the meeting with the CFO, and asked that my project manager and supervisor be present as well. The CFO responded by stating that these meetings are confidential, that there is no point in having anyone else present, and that the other parties can send their recommendations / input before the review.
Is it standard to only have a 1:1 salary review, or to include these other parties?
Having them present would definitely strengthen my case, and I feel like the CFO is purposefully trying to avoid that.
salary negotiation performance-reviews
asked Apr 14 '15 at 15:45
VLab
91
closed as off-topic by gnat, Michael Grubey, Chris E, Jenny D, yochannah Apr 19 '15 at 12:11
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – gnat, Michael Grubey, Chris E, Jenny D, yochannah
3
Sounds pretty specific to your organization. I'd say have your PM and supervisor write strong recommendations for you and hope for the best, or involve the CEO if you feel strongly enough about it.
– Brian
Apr 14 '15 at 15:47
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I work at a small start up, and recently asked to have a salary review. I set up the meeting with the CFO, and asked that my project manager and supervisor be present as well. The CFO responded by stating that these meetings are confidential, that there is no point in having anyone else present, and that the other parties can send their recommendations / input before the review.
Is it standard to only have a 1:1 salary review, or to include these other parties?
Having them present would definitely strengthen my case, and I feel like the CFO is purposefully trying to avoid that.
salary negotiation performance-reviews
asked Apr 14 '15 at 15:45
VLab
91
I work at a small start up, and recently asked to have a salary review. I set up the meeting with the CFO, and asked that my project manager and supervisor be present as well. The CFO responded by stating that these meetings are confidential, that there is no point in having anyone else present, and that the other parties can send their recommendations / input before the review.
Is it standard to only have a 1:1 salary review, or to include these other parties?
Having them present would definitely strengthen my case, and I feel like the CFO is purposefully trying to avoid that.
salary negotiation performance-reviews
asked Apr 14 '15 at 15:45
VLab
91
asked Apr 14 '15 at 15:45
VLab
91
asked Apr 14 '15 at 15:45
VLab
91
asked Apr 14 '15 at 15:45
VLab
91
91
closed as off-topic by gnat, Michael Grubey, Chris E, Jenny D, yochannah Apr 19 '15 at 12:11
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – gnat, Michael Grubey, Chris E, Jenny D, yochannah
closed as off-topic by gnat, Michael Grubey, Chris E, Jenny D, yochannah Apr 19 '15 at 12:11
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – gnat, Michael Grubey, Chris E, Jenny D, yochannah
3
Sounds pretty specific to your organization. I'd say have your PM and supervisor write strong recommendations for you and hope for the best, or involve the CEO if you feel strongly enough about it.
– Brian
Apr 14 '15 at 15:47
suggest improvements |Â
3
Sounds pretty specific to your organization. I'd say have your PM and supervisor write strong recommendations for you and hope for the best, or involve the CEO if you feel strongly enough about it.
– Brian
Apr 14 '15 at 15:47
3
3
Sounds pretty specific to your organization. I'd say have your PM and supervisor write strong recommendations for you and hope for the best, or involve the CEO if you feel strongly enough about it.
– Brian
Apr 14 '15 at 15:47
Sounds pretty specific to your organization. I'd say have your PM and supervisor write strong recommendations for you and hope for the best, or involve the CEO if you feel strongly enough about it.
– Brian
Apr 14 '15 at 15:47
suggest improvements |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
When I had a large team (tech manager) and we were doing a salary review, it was HR and me. But this is at a very large company and I had close to 40 employees at one point. If someone wanted a bump I had a range to play with. This was based on my evaluation of the employee's skills, the going rate on the market (in our city), the amount we are paying for new employees at same position, length of time employee has been at position, and overall teamwork/work ethic.
If the employee wanted something a little out of range I had to get it OK'ed. My boss - Regional Director - would have to get this signed off at the VP level. If it was well out of range we often looked at either talking the employee down or we looked at finding them a position where the salary matched better - or just said no.
Having a one-on-one with the CFO is just cutting out the middle man. If it is a small enough company to do this then chances are he/she understands your value. The CFO doesn't want an advocate for the employee getting the raise either in most cases. In reality if said manager was at meeting the CFO would want them to be matter-of-fact and neutral or shut-up.
Here are some reasons that I could think of for the one-on-one with CFO:
- CFO wants to cut out the middle-man. Also the CFO may recognize that maybe the manager is too invested in their employee.
- CFO simply doesn't trust that the manager would handle the situation well. For instance the CFO might have to tell the manager the range that they will accept. Let's say you make 80k and you want 95k. Manager can offer up to 100k and tells you this before you give away your side. Even worse your manager is a good friend and tells you to ask for 110k so he can "talk you down" to the full 100k.
- CFO could be looking at increasing your position at a company. I know that I hated giving large raises with no change in position. Employee comes in and negotiates a 20% increase then 3 months later applies for a job that they should get and expects another 10%. CFO might feel that these talks need to be private because you moving to a new position might not be what your current (happy) manager wants.
answered Apr 14 '15 at 16:30
blankip
19.9k74781
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
I would say your CFO is right. A salary review is a renegotiation of the terms between the employee (represented by you) and the company (represented by the company).
In this meeting it is your responsibility to convince the other party that your work is worth the increase in salary, so prepare accordingly. It's not the company's responsibility to justify not giving you a raise because you are the asking party in this case. If the CFO feels they require information from your project manager and/or supervisor in order to make a judgement on whether or not to grant you an increase in salary, they will contact them beforehand to inquire about your performance and whatever other information they feel they need to know to come to a conclusion.
What you can do is ask your project manager and supervisor to provide a written statement that they feel you are an excellent worker and (if you can get them to go this far) that they feel you deserve an increase in salary.
Remember that you have the disadvantage in this case. As far as the company is concerned, they have a satisfying situation: the work is getting done for a reward that they are happy to give. You need to consider in advance how important the increase in salary is to you and negotiate accordingly. Are you ready to leave for another company if you don't get the increase or would it simply be a nice bonus if you can get it?
answered Apr 14 '15 at 15:57
Cronax
7,69432235
1
If I were the manager, I would not want my team negotiating solely with the CFO or anyone else. I would want to fight for the people I wanted to keep bad enough. I don't want to lose my best team member because the CFO took offense during the meeting.
– user8365
Apr 14 '15 at 16:48
@JeffO Note that the answer doesn't say that the manager is to have no input to the proceedings.
– DJClayworth
Apr 14 '15 at 16:52
I'm not sure fairness is served by the people who stand the best chance of knowing what the employee does all day being absent.
– Nathan Cooper
Apr 16 '15 at 6:40
This has nothing to do with fairness. Those people definitely need to be heard, but this is a negotiation between the OP and the CFO, they have no place there. If the negotiation doesn't get the desired result, that's where the manager/supervisor can step in and send the message up the foodchain that this employee is worth keeping.
– Cronax
Apr 16 '15 at 7:51
suggest improvements |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
When I had a large team (tech manager) and we were doing a salary review, it was HR and me. But this is at a very large company and I had close to 40 employees at one point. If someone wanted a bump I had a range to play with. This was based on my evaluation of the employee's skills, the going rate on the market (in our city), the amount we are paying for new employees at same position, length of time employee has been at position, and overall teamwork/work ethic.
If the employee wanted something a little out of range I had to get it OK'ed. My boss - Regional Director - would have to get this signed off at the VP level. If it was well out of range we often looked at either talking the employee down or we looked at finding them a position where the salary matched better - or just said no.
Having a one-on-one with the CFO is just cutting out the middle man. If it is a small enough company to do this then chances are he/she understands your value. The CFO doesn't want an advocate for the employee getting the raise either in most cases. In reality if said manager was at meeting the CFO would want them to be matter-of-fact and neutral or shut-up.
Here are some reasons that I could think of for the one-on-one with CFO:
- CFO wants to cut out the middle-man. Also the CFO may recognize that maybe the manager is too invested in their employee.
- CFO simply doesn't trust that the manager would handle the situation well. For instance the CFO might have to tell the manager the range that they will accept. Let's say you make 80k and you want 95k. Manager can offer up to 100k and tells you this before you give away your side. Even worse your manager is a good friend and tells you to ask for 110k so he can "talk you down" to the full 100k.
- CFO could be looking at increasing your position at a company. I know that I hated giving large raises with no change in position. Employee comes in and negotiates a 20% increase then 3 months later applies for a job that they should get and expects another 10%. CFO might feel that these talks need to be private because you moving to a new position might not be what your current (happy) manager wants.
answered Apr 14 '15 at 16:30
blankip
19.9k74781
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
When I had a large team (tech manager) and we were doing a salary review, it was HR and me. But this is at a very large company and I had close to 40 employees at one point. If someone wanted a bump I had a range to play with. This was based on my evaluation of the employee's skills, the going rate on the market (in our city), the amount we are paying for new employees at same position, length of time employee has been at position, and overall teamwork/work ethic.
If the employee wanted something a little out of range I had to get it OK'ed. My boss - Regional Director - would have to get this signed off at the VP level. If it was well out of range we often looked at either talking the employee down or we looked at finding them a position where the salary matched better - or just said no.
Having a one-on-one with the CFO is just cutting out the middle man. If it is a small enough company to do this then chances are he/she understands your value. The CFO doesn't want an advocate for the employee getting the raise either in most cases. In reality if said manager was at meeting the CFO would want them to be matter-of-fact and neutral or shut-up.
Here are some reasons that I could think of for the one-on-one with CFO:
- CFO wants to cut out the middle-man. Also the CFO may recognize that maybe the manager is too invested in their employee.
- CFO simply doesn't trust that the manager would handle the situation well. For instance the CFO might have to tell the manager the range that they will accept. Let's say you make 80k and you want 95k. Manager can offer up to 100k and tells you this before you give away your side. Even worse your manager is a good friend and tells you to ask for 110k so he can "talk you down" to the full 100k.
- CFO could be looking at increasing your position at a company. I know that I hated giving large raises with no change in position. Employee comes in and negotiates a 20% increase then 3 months later applies for a job that they should get and expects another 10%. CFO might feel that these talks need to be private because you moving to a new position might not be what your current (happy) manager wants.
answered Apr 14 '15 at 16:30
blankip
19.9k74781
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
When I had a large team (tech manager) and we were doing a salary review, it was HR and me. But this is at a very large company and I had close to 40 employees at one point. If someone wanted a bump I had a range to play with. This was based on my evaluation of the employee's skills, the going rate on the market (in our city), the amount we are paying for new employees at same position, length of time employee has been at position, and overall teamwork/work ethic.
If the employee wanted something a little out of range I had to get it OK'ed. My boss - Regional Director - would have to get this signed off at the VP level. If it was well out of range we often looked at either talking the employee down or we looked at finding them a position where the salary matched better - or just said no.
Having a one-on-one with the CFO is just cutting out the middle man. If it is a small enough company to do this then chances are he/she understands your value. The CFO doesn't want an advocate for the employee getting the raise either in most cases. In reality if said manager was at meeting the CFO would want them to be matter-of-fact and neutral or shut-up.
Here are some reasons that I could think of for the one-on-one with CFO:
- CFO wants to cut out the middle-man. Also the CFO may recognize that maybe the manager is too invested in their employee.
- CFO simply doesn't trust that the manager would handle the situation well. For instance the CFO might have to tell the manager the range that they will accept. Let's say you make 80k and you want 95k. Manager can offer up to 100k and tells you this before you give away your side. Even worse your manager is a good friend and tells you to ask for 110k so he can "talk you down" to the full 100k.
- CFO could be looking at increasing your position at a company. I know that I hated giving large raises with no change in position. Employee comes in and negotiates a 20% increase then 3 months later applies for a job that they should get and expects another 10%. CFO might feel that these talks need to be private because you moving to a new position might not be what your current (happy) manager wants.
answered Apr 14 '15 at 16:30
blankip
19.9k74781
When I had a large team (tech manager) and we were doing a salary review, it was HR and me. But this is at a very large company and I had close to 40 employees at one point. If someone wanted a bump I had a range to play with. This was based on my evaluation of the employee's skills, the going rate on the market (in our city), the amount we are paying for new employees at same position, length of time employee has been at position, and overall teamwork/work ethic.
If the employee wanted something a little out of range I had to get it OK'ed. My boss - Regional Director - would have to get this signed off at the VP level. If it was well out of range we often looked at either talking the employee down or we looked at finding them a position where the salary matched better - or just said no.
Having a one-on-one with the CFO is just cutting out the middle man. If it is a small enough company to do this then chances are he/she understands your value. The CFO doesn't want an advocate for the employee getting the raise either in most cases. In reality if said manager was at meeting the CFO would want them to be matter-of-fact and neutral or shut-up.
Here are some reasons that I could think of for the one-on-one with CFO:
- CFO wants to cut out the middle-man. Also the CFO may recognize that maybe the manager is too invested in their employee.
- CFO simply doesn't trust that the manager would handle the situation well. For instance the CFO might have to tell the manager the range that they will accept. Let's say you make 80k and you want 95k. Manager can offer up to 100k and tells you this before you give away your side. Even worse your manager is a good friend and tells you to ask for 110k so he can "talk you down" to the full 100k.
- CFO could be looking at increasing your position at a company. I know that I hated giving large raises with no change in position. Employee comes in and negotiates a 20% increase then 3 months later applies for a job that they should get and expects another 10%. CFO might feel that these talks need to be private because you moving to a new position might not be what your current (happy) manager wants.
answered Apr 14 '15 at 16:30
blankip
19.9k74781
edited Apr 14 '15 at 17:36
answered Apr 14 '15 at 16:30
blankip
19.9k74781
answered Apr 14 '15 at 16:30
blankip
19.9k74781
answered Apr 14 '15 at 16:30
blankip
19.9k74781
19.9k74781
suggest improvements |Â
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
I would say your CFO is right. A salary review is a renegotiation of the terms between the employee (represented by you) and the company (represented by the company).
In this meeting it is your responsibility to convince the other party that your work is worth the increase in salary, so prepare accordingly. It's not the company's responsibility to justify not giving you a raise because you are the asking party in this case. If the CFO feels they require information from your project manager and/or supervisor in order to make a judgement on whether or not to grant you an increase in salary, they will contact them beforehand to inquire about your performance and whatever other information they feel they need to know to come to a conclusion.
What you can do is ask your project manager and supervisor to provide a written statement that they feel you are an excellent worker and (if you can get them to go this far) that they feel you deserve an increase in salary.
Remember that you have the disadvantage in this case. As far as the company is concerned, they have a satisfying situation: the work is getting done for a reward that they are happy to give. You need to consider in advance how important the increase in salary is to you and negotiate accordingly. Are you ready to leave for another company if you don't get the increase or would it simply be a nice bonus if you can get it?
answered Apr 14 '15 at 15:57
Cronax
7,69432235
1
If I were the manager, I would not want my team negotiating solely with the CFO or anyone else. I would want to fight for the people I wanted to keep bad enough. I don't want to lose my best team member because the CFO took offense during the meeting.
– user8365
Apr 14 '15 at 16:48
@JeffO Note that the answer doesn't say that the manager is to have no input to the proceedings.
– DJClayworth
Apr 14 '15 at 16:52
I'm not sure fairness is served by the people who stand the best chance of knowing what the employee does all day being absent.
– Nathan Cooper
Apr 16 '15 at 6:40
This has nothing to do with fairness. Those people definitely need to be heard, but this is a negotiation between the OP and the CFO, they have no place there. If the negotiation doesn't get the desired result, that's where the manager/supervisor can step in and send the message up the foodchain that this employee is worth keeping.
– Cronax
Apr 16 '15 at 7:51
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
I would say your CFO is right. A salary review is a renegotiation of the terms between the employee (represented by you) and the company (represented by the company).
In this meeting it is your responsibility to convince the other party that your work is worth the increase in salary, so prepare accordingly. It's not the company's responsibility to justify not giving you a raise because you are the asking party in this case. If the CFO feels they require information from your project manager and/or supervisor in order to make a judgement on whether or not to grant you an increase in salary, they will contact them beforehand to inquire about your performance and whatever other information they feel they need to know to come to a conclusion.
What you can do is ask your project manager and supervisor to provide a written statement that they feel you are an excellent worker and (if you can get them to go this far) that they feel you deserve an increase in salary.
Remember that you have the disadvantage in this case. As far as the company is concerned, they have a satisfying situation: the work is getting done for a reward that they are happy to give. You need to consider in advance how important the increase in salary is to you and negotiate accordingly. Are you ready to leave for another company if you don't get the increase or would it simply be a nice bonus if you can get it?
answered Apr 14 '15 at 15:57
Cronax
7,69432235
1
If I were the manager, I would not want my team negotiating solely with the CFO or anyone else. I would want to fight for the people I wanted to keep bad enough. I don't want to lose my best team member because the CFO took offense during the meeting.
– user8365
Apr 14 '15 at 16:48
@JeffO Note that the answer doesn't say that the manager is to have no input to the proceedings.
– DJClayworth
Apr 14 '15 at 16:52
I'm not sure fairness is served by the people who stand the best chance of knowing what the employee does all day being absent.
– Nathan Cooper
Apr 16 '15 at 6:40
This has nothing to do with fairness. Those people definitely need to be heard, but this is a negotiation between the OP and the CFO, they have no place there. If the negotiation doesn't get the desired result, that's where the manager/supervisor can step in and send the message up the foodchain that this employee is worth keeping.
– Cronax
Apr 16 '15 at 7:51
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
I would say your CFO is right. A salary review is a renegotiation of the terms between the employee (represented by you) and the company (represented by the company).
In this meeting it is your responsibility to convince the other party that your work is worth the increase in salary, so prepare accordingly. It's not the company's responsibility to justify not giving you a raise because you are the asking party in this case. If the CFO feels they require information from your project manager and/or supervisor in order to make a judgement on whether or not to grant you an increase in salary, they will contact them beforehand to inquire about your performance and whatever other information they feel they need to know to come to a conclusion.
What you can do is ask your project manager and supervisor to provide a written statement that they feel you are an excellent worker and (if you can get them to go this far) that they feel you deserve an increase in salary.
Remember that you have the disadvantage in this case. As far as the company is concerned, they have a satisfying situation: the work is getting done for a reward that they are happy to give. You need to consider in advance how important the increase in salary is to you and negotiate accordingly. Are you ready to leave for another company if you don't get the increase or would it simply be a nice bonus if you can get it?
answered Apr 14 '15 at 15:57
Cronax
7,69432235
I would say your CFO is right. A salary review is a renegotiation of the terms between the employee (represented by you) and the company (represented by the company).
In this meeting it is your responsibility to convince the other party that your work is worth the increase in salary, so prepare accordingly. It's not the company's responsibility to justify not giving you a raise because you are the asking party in this case. If the CFO feels they require information from your project manager and/or supervisor in order to make a judgement on whether or not to grant you an increase in salary, they will contact them beforehand to inquire about your performance and whatever other information they feel they need to know to come to a conclusion.
What you can do is ask your project manager and supervisor to provide a written statement that they feel you are an excellent worker and (if you can get them to go this far) that they feel you deserve an increase in salary.
Remember that you have the disadvantage in this case. As far as the company is concerned, they have a satisfying situation: the work is getting done for a reward that they are happy to give. You need to consider in advance how important the increase in salary is to you and negotiate accordingly. Are you ready to leave for another company if you don't get the increase or would it simply be a nice bonus if you can get it?
answered Apr 14 '15 at 15:57
Cronax
7,69432235
answered Apr 14 '15 at 15:57
Cronax
7,69432235
answered Apr 14 '15 at 15:57
Cronax
7,69432235
answered Apr 14 '15 at 15:57
Cronax
7,69432235
7,69432235
1
If I were the manager, I would not want my team negotiating solely with the CFO or anyone else. I would want to fight for the people I wanted to keep bad enough. I don't want to lose my best team member because the CFO took offense during the meeting.
– user8365
Apr 14 '15 at 16:48
@JeffO Note that the answer doesn't say that the manager is to have no input to the proceedings.
– DJClayworth
Apr 14 '15 at 16:52
I'm not sure fairness is served by the people who stand the best chance of knowing what the employee does all day being absent.
– Nathan Cooper
Apr 16 '15 at 6:40
This has nothing to do with fairness. Those people definitely need to be heard, but this is a negotiation between the OP and the CFO, they have no place there. If the negotiation doesn't get the desired result, that's where the manager/supervisor can step in and send the message up the foodchain that this employee is worth keeping.
– Cronax
Apr 16 '15 at 7:51
suggest improvements |Â
1
If I were the manager, I would not want my team negotiating solely with the CFO or anyone else. I would want to fight for the people I wanted to keep bad enough. I don't want to lose my best team member because the CFO took offense during the meeting.
– user8365
Apr 14 '15 at 16:48
@JeffO Note that the answer doesn't say that the manager is to have no input to the proceedings.
– DJClayworth
Apr 14 '15 at 16:52
I'm not sure fairness is served by the people who stand the best chance of knowing what the employee does all day being absent.
– Nathan Cooper
Apr 16 '15 at 6:40
This has nothing to do with fairness. Those people definitely need to be heard, but this is a negotiation between the OP and the CFO, they have no place there. If the negotiation doesn't get the desired result, that's where the manager/supervisor can step in and send the message up the foodchain that this employee is worth keeping.
– Cronax
Apr 16 '15 at 7:51
1
1
If I were the manager, I would not want my team negotiating solely with the CFO or anyone else. I would want to fight for the people I wanted to keep bad enough. I don't want to lose my best team member because the CFO took offense during the meeting.
– user8365
Apr 14 '15 at 16:48
If I were the manager, I would not want my team negotiating solely with the CFO or anyone else. I would want to fight for the people I wanted to keep bad enough. I don't want to lose my best team member because the CFO took offense during the meeting.
– user8365
Apr 14 '15 at 16:48
@JeffO Note that the answer doesn't say that the manager is to have no input to the proceedings.
– DJClayworth
Apr 14 '15 at 16:52
@JeffO Note that the answer doesn't say that the manager is to have no input to the proceedings.
– DJClayworth
Apr 14 '15 at 16:52
I'm not sure fairness is served by the people who stand the best chance of knowing what the employee does all day being absent.
– Nathan Cooper
Apr 16 '15 at 6:40
I'm not sure fairness is served by the people who stand the best chance of knowing what the employee does all day being absent.
– Nathan Cooper
Apr 16 '15 at 6:40
This has nothing to do with fairness. Those people definitely need to be heard, but this is a negotiation between the OP and the CFO, they have no place there. If the negotiation doesn't get the desired result, that's where the manager/supervisor can step in and send the message up the foodchain that this employee is worth keeping.
– Cronax
Apr 16 '15 at 7:51
This has nothing to do with fairness. Those people definitely need to be heard, but this is a negotiation between the OP and the CFO, they have no place there. If the negotiation doesn't get the desired result, that's where the manager/supervisor can step in and send the message up the foodchain that this employee is worth keeping.
– Cronax
Apr 16 '15 at 7:51
suggest improvements |Â
3
Sounds pretty specific to your organization. I'd say have your PM and supervisor write strong recommendations for you and hope for the best, or involve the CEO if you feel strongly enough about it.
– Brian
Apr 14 '15 at 15:47