Related Posts
Bowl Leader
More Posts
Bowl Leader
Additional Posts in Partner One
What is base pay range for L5 at Accenture?
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
That was just a preview…
Sign Up to see all discussions
Sign Up to see all discussions
- Discover what it’s like to work at companies from real professionals
- Get candid advice from people in your field in a safe space
- Chat and network with other professionals in your field
Sign up in seconds to unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
"" is an unusual email domain. If correct, please proceed to the next step
Messaging rates may apply
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Share
Embed this post
Copy and paste embed code on your site
Preview
Download the
Fishbowl app
Scan your QR code to download
Fishbowl app on your mobile
Sign up for free to view this conversation on Fishbowl
Sign up for free to continue using Fishbowl
Messaging rates may apply
The way to solve this is not via talent team . Have side bar with the managing partner and clue them in . Will get resolved quickly
OP, you’re not telling us which firm but I have to tell you this is very difficult for me to believe for any of the MBB or B4 or IBM or really any of the larger ones in the US, Canada or Western Europe as we all have standard process for this and this simply will not fly if documented evaluations were excellent and the only reason would be not meeting utilization goal due to LOA, regardless of which type of LOA. This would be clear case of retaliation and large firms will simply never take that risk. Having been through several situations where our people went on PIP, it is not an easy ordeal and requires multiple consultations with HR and practice leader and in cases involving LOAs, sometimes even GCO weighing in.
You’ve responded with more righteous talk bit no details, which unfortunately makes me think there’s more to this that you’re either not sharing with us or maybe not aware of.
SM then don’t write the pip and tell them it’s illegal. Problem solved?
Utilization, but leadership still insists on proceeding w/the PIP. This is disappointing to treating people as a number and not look at the color of their story. Ironically, it’s silly to write up a PIP when there’s no bad feedback on their performance, when we aren’t doing the math correctly. The PIP’s on us. I feel like I failed my counselee.
Sad to hear this. But proud and happy to see such a good counselor who cares so much!
I’d escalate to talent, not to just PPMDs. That’s literally not allowed per most company policies otherwise every woman coming back from maternity leave would be on a PIP.
@D1, no, he still has his PTO. But Talent’s not investigating. I did the math, his utilization is compared against the general utilization. Seeing how this organization is working against its own talent is chilling and I doesn’t want yo be part of this.
That really is a 💩 situation, even after leadership intervention! I’m livid for you and her. Assuming this happened recently, I hope she contested and have consulted employment attorney to seek recourse or lawfulness. Best of luck to her, and please let me know how it goes by DM. Stay in touch.
There must be more to the story... literally that is against the rules. LoA changes your utilization base number. Did your counselee take all time off (pto) from 2 years combined (saved up from last year and took it this year and all of this year’s pto) and have bench time?
Can you contact HR?
Y I K E S
LoA does not change our utilization base number (denominator). I had a temporary separation from the firm due to visa purposes (no salary, no comp or benefits for 2 months) and my utilization dropped to a horrifying 60~%. I told HR it was wholly unfair to have it count to my utilization especially since i wasnt even getting paid during that time, and their response was that its Leave of Absence that is non-chargeable and as long as the Partner knows, itll be fine
It wasnt fine, and i got a Tier 3 rating that year.
False. Paternity leave reduces the denominator
Agree with VP1. Make sure the partners are aware. This would literally be considered retaliation if this is the only reason. I’m not sure what firm you’re at but I’m a bit surprised frankly.
The two I’ve been at track both full (same denominator across everyone) and effective utilization (standard denominator minus excused leave and pto), so it allows you to compare people across the timeline as well as across their actual available hours to work.
I’m not bullying you. Just pointing out you have provided no details beyond your opinion and consistent reiteration it is not fair. You also not commenting on the advice you’re receiving or sharing if you have taken any actions; you’re mostly venting. It’s fine to vent but it seems a bit unbalanced.
If you truly believe the PIP is given purely because utilization is not met due to LOA and you’re in the US, then you should absolutely report it whether it is done formally through HR or anonymously through ethics hotline as others have suggested .
Also FMLA does not apply as you would have to be a primary caretaker (which is most likely his wife or SO) and it also, even if he was the primary caretaker, FMLA protects your job for 12 weeks, that’s it.
OP - P1 is making some valid points and your reaction to them is very telling. I'd imagine that the folks you're speaking to within your firm may be raising similar issues, and I fear that if you handle it the way you have done so here, your counselee is hosed. If the LOA is the ONLY thing driving this PIP, it is illegal and you dont have to comply. I suggest resisting on doing the PIP and see if the real reason emerges. People tend to avoid difficult conversations, but if you force the issue by explaining the ethical issue, I'm sure you'll uncover whatever the real issue is.
As far as your responses, I'd recommend focusing on what people are trying to tell you and internalizing it as constructive feedback, rather than cherry picking the comments that help your confirmation bias. There are a lot of folks in this forum trying to help you, including P1.
Sounds so D
It doesn’t. D can do many things wrong, but not this (at least in my observation). I have seen many people getting promoted in the year they took full 16 (some took less) weeks of maternity/paternity leaves. Also seen people getting promoted in the year they were on bench for few months. And they weren’t “favorite” either.
SM1: can I work for you? I wish my counselor was like you. ☹️
If you’re at Deloitte its typical. I’ve been really disappointed by our HR Talent processes since I started. Really sad, not looking to get counselees myself because of this
Depending on the leave, if it’s as you say, this could be illegal. So I’m not so sure this is all there is to it...
Paternal LOA. Sure, people can sometimes have behind the door conversation outside the consensus. In that case, do what’s right to terminate w/a package. But don’t use PIP to build a BS case to screw with people’s employment record and bonus. Leadership and firm knows its own culture, and if we behave like this, that is shameful.
@SM I commend you for caring. This is the fundamental problem in the society. No wonder there are so many divorced people in consulting. Discouraging people from taking parental LOA results in mothers quitting the workforce or automatic assumption that it’s the women’s job only to raise the kids and take care of the family.
This, call ethics hotline. Get visibility on this. Then... tell them it is not about the details, it is about how high they bounce
Please keep fighting on behalf of your counselee!!!
Forget HR. Call ethics
So, update? Did you talk reason into the powers that be?
Appears to be D?
Also happens at IBM...