Lauren Tickner, CEO of a British marketing company, has sparked debate after revealing she denied an employee's request for a two-day leave to attend their own wedding. However, there is a twist. Ms Tickner took to Threads to justify her decision, claiming the employee had already taken 2.5 weeks off and failed to train a replacement, jeopardising two critical projects. Initially, the CEO stated that the employee's lack of preparation and training for a replacement was the reason for denying leave. She emphasied the team's pressing deadlines and instructed the employee to find and train a substitute before taking time off.
Later, she clarified her earlier statement and highlighted the company's 'flexible time off' policy that allows employees to take leave without managerial approval. Despite denying the initial request, Ms Tickner told the employee to use the unlimited time off policy for future absences, bypassing the need for approval.
"It's called Flexible Time Off. (The opposite of micromanagement & outdated policies).- Your employees set their hours. - They work where they want. - They take days off when they choose,'' she wrote.
''The biggest benefit? A-players don't respect slackers. Anyone taking too much time off loses status. Flexible Time Off is a policy that creates trusting teams. What's your approach to unlimited time off?'', she added.
See the post here:
The post has ignited debate on social media, with many users being confused by her approach. Some also pointed out the hypocrisy, highlighting that Ms Tickner's actions contradicted her company's Flexible Time Off policy.
One user wrote, ''Firstly, finding and training a replacement is the manager's job, not the employee's. Secondly, what if there is no replacement available? Do they still get to take time off? No? it's not unlimited time off then, is it?''
Another commented, ''The part I don't like is anyone taking too much time off loses status. You are pretty much-guiding people into not using their PTO. And who determines what too much time is? Some employers might think 2 weeks a year is the most a person needs. I would disagree.''
Meanwhile, her attempts to address the backlash only fueled further confusion, despite her repeated requests for people to "read till the end" of her explanations. She also faced allegations of "rage-baiting" after many suggested she deliberately crafted a provocative post to stir controversy and boost engagement.
A third person stated, ''So you offer unlimited time off but refuse time off for the biggest day of their lives? And why is it your employee's job to train someone to replace them it's yours surely.''
''Train a replacement for 2 days? To get married? If your team can't function without one person for TWO DAYS, and you can't help with their tasks or delegate them, then you aren't running your team very well. I hope this post was rage bait because it's gross,” a fourth added.
from NDTV News- Topstories https://ift.tt/qJnPi2l
Comments
Post a Comment