Slashdot Mirror
Getting Fired For Not Taking A Promotion?
iKantBelieveThis asks: "I work in a relatively small (6-8 person) IT shop for a branch of a Large company. I am the #2 person in the department, and the IT Manager is leaving the company. It seems that management has determined that I am going to take over and be promoted to IT Manager. I don't want this. I am quite happy where I am, doing what I am doing and the pay is just fine. I don't want the headaches, political bickering and exposure to hostile fire that being the IT Manager entails. I am willing to take temporary responsibility for the operation, that is part of my job description. I am not refusing that part of the deal, I just don't want it to be permanent." Why should an employee be forced into a permanent promotion if they are doing well in their current one. Of course...in the corporate world, things are never as simple (or logical) as they should be.
"The company, however, is saying that either I take the promotion or be dismissed. Part of their reasoning is that if I am refusing the appointment, I must not be qualified for the job (I am qualified), even though I don't want it to begin with. Ah, the joys of corporate logic."
In the US, that's called "Standard Operating Procedure."
Speaking as one in that position in a previous company, that is the worst thing that can happen to you. Picture a Dilbert being moved into the PHB's position (the PHB left) and the company/customers expecting Dilbert to react/behave like the former PHB. Welcome to Hell.
What do you expect a fucking dumbass (sorry, it's Monday for me) headhunter to say? They want you to go with the new job so they can get paid. Headhunters are like lawyers, necessary scum. I know people who do this every couple of years, like clockwork. Let's face it, the *ONLY* way to get a real raise (2% my ass) is to either get a new job or blackmail the boss. It is actually more of an "offer blackmail" than resume. I love the way companies pay kids right out of college more than long time employees who actually know the job.
Just Curious...
A recruiter will tell you black is white if they think they will make any money from it.
This is usually a terrible idea; depending on where you live and who you work for. Here in the Midwest the moment you started getting upitty like that they'd can you, and blacklist you. I know several people who've tried pulling this sort of thing who will "never work in this town again." Which is of course why most IT folk ditch the Midwest for the coasts if they can ASAP.
Mind that if you're in a department of a large company that has it's HQ and decision making done in the Midwest they'll can you even if you're on the coast.
Some companies are not up to speed on the new economy, and don't deal well with issuing of ultimatums position being reversed. Also, people generally don't like being threatened no matter what the situation. If you get confrontational like this you may get to keep the job, but it won't be as comfortable or as nice as it once was. You may end up having to quit anyway.
Some management are wise to the "promoted to level of incompetance" concept, and don't really want a talented IT person promoted to where he or she can't help the bottom line anymore. Point out where you've save them money as number two that you can't if promoted to number one. Perhaps this is just a communications issue, and they want you to keep on doing what you're doing, but need you to have the new job title so all of the corporate i's and t's are dotted and crossed.
Always frame these peon to boss arguments in terms of money and how what you want will benefit them. Fundamentally, nobody gives a shit about anyone but themselves.
You shouldn't have to threaten, nor should you expect that your job is going to stay static for the rest of your career. I'd suggest you pick out the things that make you most uncomfortable about the new position and bargain with them. "I'll give you this, if you give me this." for example.
This would be an opportunity to cut down on meetings and weasel some extra conferences out of your bosses maybe?
I'd also suggest two excellent books on corporate politics. One is "I love the job, but hate the People - How to swim with the sharks without being one" and the other is "It's a job not a jail". I'm sorry, but I don't have the author names on hand. Both books give an eye-opening view of what goes on in management heads.
ulterior: [other stuff removed] 2 : going beyond what is openly said or shown and especially what is proper.
Taken from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
When everyone moves up a notch, that means that nobody in the department is doing what they were hired to do, or even what they've been getting good at. You'll have to train everyone, and the people who know the jobs are either gone or trying to learn other jobs themselves.
The best solution is to promote someone who wants the job, has the right skills for it, and is easier to replace than the original person. Failing that, it's better to high a new person at the top level and train them to work with the department than to mess with the existing structure of the department. Of course, that requires finding someone who can be new at the top level without destroying the department.
Of course, as long as he avoids getting fired, or laid off, being passed over for promotion is exactly what he wants in the first place... :)
Shawn Asmussen
You are demonstrating what can be considerd a lack of ambition. I remember his imprial Gatesness saying in an interview that Microsoft got to be where it is because almost everyone in the company wants his job.
Frankly I would seriusly consider tosing a number 2 techie that rejected a promotion to IT manager. It basicaly says "this goy dose not want to accept responsibility for what hapens."
I would keap you if you came with a *good* excuse like "The IT Manager has a realy hot secretery that I am trying to seduce. If she is my secretary then that becomes harasment.". Avoiding political bikering is not a good excuse. I would toss out your unambitius ass.
PS: For your own sake I would suggest you take it. Even for a 12 months. "My last job was IT Manager at ACME." looks really nice on a resume.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
Lying was never considerd as an option. At least not by me. When all else colapses around you all you have got is your personal integrity.
I would never tell him to sacrifice that.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
Nazi Germany made a nice car ( The VW Bug ) and Bill Gates made lots of money. Business is purely and totaly about making money. His business stratagys obviusly worked to some extent so every MSFT policy is worth consideration. Sure some are dumb but all need looking at if you are bent on making money.
Of course not everyone wants to be Gates. He just surounded himself with people who do.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
A similar thing happened to me. A year ago my company tried to promote me to a management position, and I said no. My feeling was that at this point in my career, abandoning a technical job for a management job would be a one-way trap door -- it would be very hard to go back to a technical job in the future after being "management" for any non-trivial period of time. When they leaned on me, I said that I was happy with my current set of responsibilities, and would sooner leave than take on something I was not comfortable with. I guess they valued my work, since they backed right off and hired someone else to do the job (someone else from within the team, and he does a much better job at it than I would have.)
--
you should read everything on the internet as if it had "but I'm probably talking out of my ass" appended to it.
It sounds like you are being consciencious about the whole thing, and they're being unreasonable. If you're qualified for the job, then you'll have no problem finding work else where. If I were in your situation, I would explain to them that I like the job I am in, and want to stay there. If they don't like it and fire you, it's not your fault. You did the "Right Thing".
Instant Karma's gonna get you...
They mention that they would fire you because you weren't qualified... but they hired you for you're current position.
Sounds like they are trying to play a political game with you. Often companies will promote within as a way of saving money. Your sallary won't get as big as they would have to pay for a new hire.
Talk to a lawyer in your state.
Is a Petafile (Petaphile) someone who wants to do it with Peta Wilson? (I think it's Wilson, the one who plays Nikita)
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
The Company, however, is saying that either I take the promotion or be dismissed...
You don't need that crap. The company doesn't value you if they give you such a senseless ultimatum. Tell them how you feel about it and if they still decline to let you keep your current position, leave. Plenty of jobs out there.
One thing you might consider, howerver, is that your contentedness with your current situation might be heavily dependenent upon the current management. If your #1 is replaced with someone else, this could change drastically.
By taking the promotion, you have more control over the direction of the department and nurturing the climate you have become so comfortable with.
If you do convince your company that you are not the right person for this job, you should still volunteer to take a more active role in the management, so that you can ensure that the environment you like persists for a while longer.
Explicit hierarchy is sometimes necessary for blame assignment, but is rarely the actual operational leadership structure. The price for displaying leadership from within the ranks is exposure to increased responsibility by promotion.
It may be that you just have to have an honest discussion with the decision makers about this. But make sure you yourself understand why you don't want this position, and can articulate that fact to your management (without bursting into tears or hollering at people).
Whatever happens, good luck!
--Jim
You're correct, of course. But what seems to go by these guys most of the time is that there's more than technical knowledge required to be a good manager. It sounds like this guy knows what he's doing from a technical standpoint (which is good) but doesn't enjoy political and administrative wrangling, which implies that he won't be very good at that sort of thing (which is bad, obviously).
I doubt it. If he despises politics, then this kind of job is just not right for him. In a best case scenario, he'd end up being mediocre.
I have a friend who has been through a similiar position.
We both worked as Unix admins, him being the senior admin, and myself being the junior admin.
Due to turmoil that I'm not going to go into, several people quit, including the Network Manager and the Director over the division. He got promoted to Network Manager, which he didn't want, then a short time later got promoted to Director, when the original replacement Director left. He hated the idea of being in a managerial position, and I know its stressful work for him. But, he's done alot for the people who work under him. And, he has the guts to stand up and try to change the bad things, since he now actually has input as a manager, unlike the usual "worker bees".
All in all, even though he hated the promotion, and is a stressful position (hence why managers make more money), he's done a good job. The switch to management is stressful and confusing at first, but I think if you are good at what you do now, and care about the group of people you work with, then it you will be able to do alot of good.
A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. -Benjamin Franklin
Well yes, that's what *I* do but once a company reaches a certain size or management style, you're an idiot of you have any emotional attachment to it. Sure you work to better your company's position, but mainly so that it will generate more cash flowing by so that you might get raises or at least better computers or something. It's management's job to try to get you emotionally attached to the company, and it's your job to realize that they're using you.
The company that I work for was a relatively small place when I came here, but it's now into the "employees are assets" mode. That's fine as long as you realize it and don't get suckered.
Beware. I have seen too many times where a temporary situation is the defacto permanent situation.
Great points here. If you are not getting the position / pay / whatever you want and can justify, there is no reason to make people upset, burn bridges, etc. Make the powers that be aware of your requests, and if they are unable to work something out, then politely and professionally look elsewhere.
--- This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine. ---
Setting his threshold to 5, Sparky eliminated most of the trolls on /.
As a the highest paid senior programmer (in a company of 35 people) I have a lot of 'clout' in that I have a hand in every project, and can openly contradict the directors without fearing for my job.
I'm aware of the subtle pressure to move into 'management'... Luckily I'm in a company that recognises that Good techie != Good manager and PHB is content to leave me where I am (actually he's trying to invent a 'not-quite-management-but-higher-than-senior' position for me so I don't get left behind)
It's an undeniable fact that techies generally have poor social skills... Unfortunately management requires the opposite, as it involves meeting customers, being diplomatic, and, shock horror, managing people! Any manager worthy of the name would recognise this and *not* attempt to promote someone against their will.
Obviously, in this case His management are not competent. On top of this they are outright bullies - trying the threaten him into promotion.
My normal attitude to this would be to let them sack you then sue for wrongful dismissal, but according to an earlier thread the US has no employee protection laws. In that case the only way out is to be proactive - leave ASAP, even if it means a pay cut. It is unlikely a company which fails to recognise the individual skills its employees has will last long anyway, so he'll have to find new work when it goes bankcrupt anyway.
Take the promotion and the full responsibility, but negotiate for a budget of open req's. Hire or promote a protoge to do the parts of the job you don't want to do, even if they seem like they should be part of your job, but put him under you in the corporate structure. Call the title something nebular like "assistant manager".
This way, you will get an upgraded salary, you'll be doing what you prefer to do, you'll learn something about delegation, and because you're still doing the hacking you enjoy, you will appear to be leading by example and will command more respect from your employees.
Think of this as a highly paid education. It's definitely not as nasty as going back to school, being forced to do arbitrary homework, dealing with super-early classes, unintelligible TA's, class and professor availability problems, etc.
...not the other way around. You can be as cocky as you want with a "my skills are in such demand I'll simply walk if I don't get to do what I want" attitude, but remember - you are very easily replaced (as much as you would like to think otherwise).
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Exactly. You took a stand, good for you, if they fire you, oh well, you're in IT... get a job tomorrow. Decisions involve consequences, don't use lawyers to change that.
And, if they keep you, get a new job anyway and as you are leaving mention that you didn't appreciate having your job held over your head. That's what "at will" is all about.
-- Keith Moore
This sig is the express property of someone.
You fool! Greenspan is Immortal, and you know it. There can be only one!
-- Keith Moore
This sig is the express property of someone.
You're right. They're wrong.
They're assholes.
You could probably win a suit for unfair dismissal.
You should get a new job anyway.
If your manager is a dick on this matter, chances are s/he'll be a dick on other matters too. Anyone with that level of idiocy is incapable of functioning as an efficient manager.
However: have you considered that this was a panicked reaction? It's possible that if you say with finality 'fuck off', they'll back down. I'd lay off the lawsuit threats until such time as you get the 'you're fired' notice; you'd only exacerbate an already bad situation with premature legal notices.
to what I just went through, although I was not threatened with being fired. We are a 5 person shop (currently running one short) and my boss just got fired... Mgmt had come to me a few weeks prior and asked if I would be interested in the position "when my boss retired in 3 years" and I told them yes, but only if I was allowed to stay "hands on". This seemed to be what they wanted from the position all along (my boss was not up to speed enough to be involved in the development)
:-)
Anyway, I took the position for two reasons: 1) I really like the company I work for - it is not a normal corporate environment at all, and 2) my ex-boss gave me some good advice before he was canned. He knew I had serious reservations about taking the position and "losing touch" by becoming too wrapped up in management to keep by skills fresh. He said that in our company, I could make the position whatever I needed it to be. It turns out that my 'management' duties are rather light and I am essentially doing the same job as before with more pay and more power to make decisions.
-- none, thank you.
It seems that the most difficult concept for non-IT people to understand is that being a manager is a different job then developer/programmer.
The second most difficult thing for managers to understand is why people don't want to become managers and the more agressive the manager the more this can be a problem. To quote Vico:"Because of man's indefinate nature, when in ignorance, he makes himself the standard of all things". Having been placed in this position several times in the last 10 years I suggest you deal with the problem from the its most difficult prospective. Explain to whomever that the "job" of management is simply a different job from the one you were hired and you simply don't want to "change" jobs. I.E. spending 40 hours a week working on Gantt charts, resource planning, personel management, report generation, company management meetings, et al is not the same as cutting code/designing and you feel that it would not be in either yours or your employers interest.
Most senior management will buy the story if you explain it to them in these terms, otherwise it may appear that you are simply a hidden slacker unable to take responsibility for the "natural development" of your career and hence must be "irresponsible by nature" and therefore (by extension) unable to do any job responsibly by default (refer to the second most difficult thing above). Unfortuately, regardless of your reasons, you will likely be viewed with skepticism by senior management for failing to demonstrate proper initiative in following "the most obvious thing in the world" (that is being promoted). Unfortuanately it seems that a majority of managers will also view this as a form of very real "Human" rejection for their personal values which will likely cast you in a position as "one of them" vs. "one of us".
If they don't care about what you want why should you care to work for them.
"The last thing I want to do is deal with a bunch of people who want something."
"The last thing I want to do is deal with a bunch of people who want something."
Major Major
It is obvious that you are done with this company. Making counter threats does nothing for you except piss off management even more. Your best solution is to see if you can do the job on an interim basis. Then during that time, find another job. Now, your bosses are happy. You can take the time to find your next dream job. Also, you might be able to work with managemnt to make your current job more palatable.
The welfare of the people has always been the alibi of tyrants. - Albert Camus
I work within a team of a dozen people. A few months ago our team lead, who was also our technical lead, was pulled onto another team. This guy is amazing, and we knew no "one" person could fill his shoes.
:) )
The project manager asked me to take his position until we found a replacement for him. Afterwards the replacement would be the team lead, and I would continue as technical lead. (This worked out, as technical lead still gets to program.
Anyway, what was suppose to last two weeks became a month and a half. Our first team lead quit after two weeks, and so we had to search again. Many times my manager asked my views on what I wanted to do; every time I told her, "I don't mind as long as I get to program". She assured me taking the position she needed me in was temporary, and that she wanted her team to be happy. (A happy team is a productive team.)
If the company values you, and you're productive where you are at they will be flexible to a degree. The trade off, is you may need to do the same. Taking a position you don't enjoy, temporarly, is a good as the company will recognize you're making a sacafice. Just make sure to let them know it's not what you are interested in doing forever.
If the company isn't flexible enough to let you stay in your position (and again, you're being productive) then start searching for a new job. I peg that as bad upper/middle management, and who knows where else in the company they are applying their flawed logic.
If the government can do it, I don't see why they would object to any companies doing it also.
well, the government (specifically the military) does lots of things it won't allow/force companies to do. i believe courts have ruled before that the military can pretty much do whatever they want with their people, but a company shouldn't be able to get away with that. i would be worried however since this guy probably has one of those clauses in his contract that says he or the company can terminate employment at any time and for any reason. in which case he's probably SOL.
"Leave the gun, take the canoli."
this is just a placeholder till i send back my real sig from the future.
Your first reason isn't valid either. Jealousy is a form of incompetence. If a manager can't deal with the fact that the market dictates that an underling make more than he does, then he really can't be all that good.
--
Bush's assertion: there ought to be limits to freedom
I agree.
I work for a large company and they have a "technical" track of advancement for people who get promoted that high. Generally, people on this track, once beyond the grunt engineer status, are allowed their pick of projects and any position (other than a grunt) within that project (writing standards, expensive R&D, techincal leadership, software architect) without having the tedious managerial position duties (budgets, personal problems, etc.).
My mind works like lightning. One brilliant flash and it is gone.
Just because you can be fired "for no reason" doesn't mean that if they have an invalid reason they can fire you..
Where I live, it's legal for a landlord to evict on 30 days notice, with no reason.
A few years ago, a woman complained to her landlord about the 'sandbox' in her apartment complex because it was full of cat feces.. The landlord didn't do anything, and the woman complained to the housing authority.. The landlord got fined many thousands of dollars, and was forced to clean up the sandbox.. a month later, the woman got an eviction notice - she was given 30 days to move, and was cited 'no reason' for the notice..
She sued the landlord, saying that she was evicted because she complained, and she won, because the judge made the distinction between "no reason" and "a bad reason".
If they've already told him he'll be fired for refusing a promotion, and he refuses, it doesn't matter if they list "no reason" on his pink slip - they've already admitted there is a reason - he can still sue them for unfair dismissal..
Unless he's got a contract with him that they're breaking, (or unless they're firing him for racist/sexist reasons) in most states they can fire him at any time for any reason or no reason. Sorry, but there's no legal recourse for mere managerial stupidity; if there were, the courts would be even more crowded, I suspect.
--
whuppy enjoys smelling like diesel fuel
In the moment of true, he showed that he has no ambition whatsoever. Isn't that a reason to get rid of him? Especially for a tiny company. You are assuming the higher up managerment are morons. That is possible for people in a big corporatetion where middle managerment come from college. But if this boss is a high school drop out who started from nothing, he is likely to be pissed off by the lack of responsibility of the said worker.
:) Really )
And another thing, the chances are, people in higher up is smarter than people in lower down, including the engineers. (You don't have to believe me, I'm a computer science and Studio Art BFA double major in making
CY
Continue to be honest with them about your goals and feelings, continue to volunteer to help find a replacement, and continue to fill in to cover the absence. Tell them you are suprised to see them make that mandate, specially since a 2nd vacancy in their organization cannot be helpful. By your description, all of your actions make you a responsible and reasonably employee. Unless you are in a spot financially, or the region you live in doesn't have many other employment alternatives, I think you can call their bluff.
And if you can't find her, find natile
a man, a plan, a canal, panama
Not true at all. Headhunters are often very up front about a lot of this stuff. Go over to eetimes.com and read the "Ask the Headhunter" columns, they've got some great advice, and often bring up the same points that my college career councilor made.
The way to get a raise is to do the work you are assigned to do, and do it well. I work for a large consulting firm, and our last raises were a paltry 3%. I simply went in, asked my boss for a raise, and gave him some examples of the work I had been doing recently. In the meantime, and unbeknownst to him, I shopped myself around, giving myself options if my boss didn't come through with what I though was a fair number.
But I got a raise, even more than what I considered to be my "minimum." And since then, the possibility of a promotion has been offered to me, and I'm currently in transition to my new position, which will include another raise shortly.
On the other hand, the last guy to attempt "resume blackmail" got his raise, too. But do you know what he's done this past year? The same stuff he's done since he started here almost 3 years ago. Prospects for promotion? Not likely. His loyalty to the company is now questionable, so why promote him into a more important position if he's just going to threaten to quit the next time he's unhappy? He's basically filling a space, and will be replaced when he leaves. So if you're planning on sticking around, resume blackmail is a decidedly bad tactic.
Of course, you can make valuable career moves when you job hop....that's how I got here in the first place, and it did result in a larger raise than most companies would be willing to give a current employee. But don't consider that your only option...there are advantages to sticking around (401k, leave acrual rates, intangibles such as seniority and percevied loyalty). If you deserve the raise, make sure you can point out why, and then make your case to your boss. As long as you don't work for an idiot, you'll probably do fine. It will only increase your value if you stick around, and when the time does come to move on, new employers will probably prefer someone with a stable job history over someone who obviously job-hops every year or two.
Hey, how'd you know I was lookin' at you if you weren't lookin' at me?
No, it's not silly. My father, for instance, has a PhD in EE and a MS in CS. He's worked for the US DoE for 30+ years. For perhaps half of that time he's been the senior engineer on any number of projects. Quite a number of times, he's been asked to be project manager. He has always refused. He is happy with his salary, and he's most happy when he gets to deal with technical issues, so he doesn't want the added hassle that management brings. His seniority, knowledge, and respect bring him enough pull in the office that he doesn't desire an official title making him the boss. Much like the author of the original question, I'm sure that he'd leave if he was ever forced into a management position.
Perhaps you want to be management, and that might be right for you. But don't assume that everyone wants to climb the corporate ladder to ever higher levels. Maybe their ultimate goal is to find a job their happy with.
Hey, how'd you know I was lookin' at you if you weren't lookin' at me?
I had this same exact thing happen. Let me tell you, you dont even want to be the IT manager on a *temporary* basis, because once youre there, they are going to take their *sweeeet* time in finding your replacement. If they do find a replacement, that person will most likely be clueless and youll find your own job becoming 10 times more difficult due to his/her incompetence. For them to fire you seems like it is likely a bluff, also. Why would they fire someone who is the best qualified for the job they are trying to fill? The only way out of this, and i think its better sooner rather than later, is just get into the escape pod, Luke.
A corporation is a legal process and type of company. It's not dependent on size.
Dave
You choose to work for a corporation. You do not have the right to question any decisions that the corporation makes.
Is the decision that they are making is illogical? Of course, they are idiots.
The reason why they will dismiss you if you do not take the promotion is that it will look bad to their superiors (i.e. bad marks on their 6 month review). These managers are trying to save their sorry asses.
ChozSun
ChozSun.com
How very myopic of you.
That is the lamest, "I just finished reading Middle Management for People With Only a Brain Stem (TM)", blather of an excuse. Think! You've just lost a valuable resource in Techie-Manager #1, Do you (a) take it out on Techie #2 and ultimately lose the next best thing (think quarterly growth, or should I say loss, here), or (b) encourage #2 to help find and bring up to speed someone that can be a managerial complement to #2's technical skills and thereby fill the missing position without creating another hole? Somewhat academic don't you think?
--
You can be an atheist and still not want to succumb to some weird cross-over sheep disease -- AC
Take the job. Do your best, but don't sweat it. Rake in the money, save as much as you can (in case you just can't take it), and meanwhile, start looking for another job.
I once got promoted to supervisor and it was a disaster. People want to promote you because of your technical expertise, but once you become a supervisor you will spend your time fielding calls from the customer and writing status reports on other people's work. Your technical skills will atrophy.
Whether you want to refuse the promotion up front or play along for awhile is up to you, but in the new economy you are better off being a skilled programmer than a so-so low-level manager.
Marjo Wycam, Master of the Programming Arts
chances are, they think that they can give you more responsibilities without a bigger paycheck; they probably KNOW that you are competent at your job, but are hoping that you would make the jump of logic that you did.
quit telling them "I just don't want to do it", tell them how much they can expect to pay for someone in that position (who works for a larger company, etc)... Something like "Hey, I'll take it, but I'll make the money for the job. Place me at a (insert value plus 25K$USD for the ass) and I'll take it... Otherwise, keep me where I'm at and pay that much for someone else, I really don't care."
It worked for me, and it can work for you. It started with them hiring somebody completely incompetant (at the salary they wanted me to work at) that blew out the mail server (a jackass NT IS guy that thought that because the case opened, the hard drives must be hot-swappable- YOINK!)
He lasted two weeks, and they decided to fork out the better dollar for the better work.
Hm. So if you're not qualified, why do they want to give you the raise? This isn't logical. And besides, if not wanting to be promoted means you are not qualified for that job (I assume they mean the new one, not your current job), then everything's fine, isn't it? I don't know about the legal stuff, but I would assume they are only trying to threaten you, but can't fire you based on this. But then, IANAL.
EagerEyes.org: Visualization and Visual Communication
I would certainly have the updated resume in the marketplace, but be absolutely sure that your debt load is managable. In my part of the world (Carolinas), it is extremely rare, even in the RTP, to walk out on one position right into another. Unless you work for yourself, you will continue to be beholden to corporate interests. Good luck to you.
It is obvious why you posted AC... Your as big a PUSSY as you claim this guy is. You sure the hell don't know Sh*t about the business world. Oh wait you must be one of those communist like-stab people in the back to get to the top types, right? I thought so.
I purposely stepped down from management and let my employer know up front when they hired me I would NOT take any promotions into management. I did not want the political BS! I like "playing with the toys" not playing with the boys - like you must like doing. You must do a great JOB on the golf course - especially as the er.. on the ball wash.
The Truth is a Virus!!!
Well good management accepts they will have subordinates that are in some ways faster smarter and better then them.
Many jobs I have had I was the 'expert' on a particular topic, my boss accepted it, used my skills and wasn't threatened by it, he still gave guidance and support when I needed it.
Managers who were afraid didn't give the support or listen, and it was very frustrating for me, and them since I couldn't work to my potential.
If you're intelligent you can rise from rank 1 (Grunt Coder) to rank 4 (Manager) and influence (In a positive way) your group... Do you think you're going to last 10K years coding? Teach someone, help the develop that's what a manager's really for, unless you want to submit yourself to the stereotype of managers being dumbasses who wouldn't know a DIMM from a CD.
The reason they offer that possition to him is because he understands the company and they want someone who won't disrupt the flow of things. If he still wants to code he can take on any of the countless open source projects lying around and help a bit (He can do that during office hours and tell the upper crust that "you're reviewing some of the project code").
I hate to agree with davecrazy but...
Corporations start at 100-500 employees. The smaller operations should be just called companies. There is a big difference in the policies and overall environment between small and big companies. IMHO, a small company is more willing to negotiate with it's employees. And in a 6 persons-company, the HR departement is totally unexistent, so the person who negotiates in the name of the company is the CEO or his wife. Been there, seen that. Now I work in a 50.000+ company, and I know I'll never meet with the CEO or his wife. Not that I miss that ;o)
Sigged!
Yeah, that's how it is in my department - people on my team routinely turn down promotions because it means leaving the toys behind and replacing them with paperwork. No, thank you. The reason we (my teammates and myself) got into this industry was to get paid to play, learn a whole bunch of cool stuff and always be ahead of the technology curve - the second we step into management we're forced to toe the policy line, pressure the coders and testers to turn out crappy product in order to meet deadlines, put the company entity ahead of the individual employees and a ton of other stuff that makes us sick. The ones who have taken the promotions left the company within a year, they've hated it so much - and then we've lost our strongest talent, usually to the competitor.
Our Ask/.er needs a new job. What his employers are doing is ridiculous. S/he'll have no trouble finding a new position where s/he can be productive and happy for a few more years.
Peter Dyck has made an intelligent comment, which should be read carefully. Allow me to be the devil's advocate and state another point of view. One of my employers had an exceptionally good wireman, far better than his associates. They promoted him to foreman, feeling he would pass his skills on to the others in his area. It was a disaster. He was a wireman, not a manager or instructor. The company ended up with lower quality work, and less one very good wireman.
One point missed by many in this thread is the company itself. It exists, makes money, hires people, sells product. They are doing something, probably many things, right. If an individual really is smarter than company management, he should be able to buy the compay out of his own pocket, or rise through the chain of command to be the head man. I do not except women, it is just difficult to write in unisex. Also, I have seen both cases succeed. People with this much talent are rare, but they exist.
As for the original question, there is much advice in the thread, but only one person who can choose. Accept the company's choice, move on, or reach a compromise. My best advice is not to antagonize anyone, and if you sue the company, get enough to live out your life in comfort, because your career is finished.
I really don't think this will fly. I know it doesn't work where I am employed; and I know for a fact it doesn't work in quite a few other shops.
I have seen this type of situation at work in our accouting department. A middle age guy who was very talented took a demotion and a cut in pay to allow him to work only 40 hours per week which enabled him to spend time with his family (something he was unable to do with his previous position). When he was offered another more responsible position he declined for the same reasons he took the demotion. He was let go the next day.
In my experience anytime you get into a situation like that it is better to take a package, get a new job doing what you like with a company that is going to treat you better. Anywhere that is going to treat you poorly is a place you don't want to be anyway.
Sit down personally with management one on one and explain in detail your reasoning for not wanting the promotion _right now_. Don't tell them (or even let them assume) that you never want to move up. Tell them you would rather stay in the position you are currently in for x reasons. If they think you don't want the position ever they are likely to assume that when you are ready to change jobs you will move elsewhere.
forge
One thing to make sure you've got overed before you take the interim position: You must have a way to either force their hand in hiring after a specified (hopefully by you ;) timeframe, or be willing to walk out the door. If my experience is any indication, things will go like this:
You take the position on the understanding that it's temporary.
They talk about how the process of finding someone to fill the position permanently is going.
You deal with twice the work for a while, and get frustrated. You demand they hire someone right away.
They can't or won't hire someone to fill the top job, but they can or will hire someone to fill your oldjob, just until someone to fill the top job can be located.
A year later, you're either in charge of the department, or you've quit.
I'm not attributing any malice to your HR department, but that's how this will turn out if you're not very careful about making absolutely sure that your return path to the job you like is clear. Don't ever accept their word that it'll all work out ok: Their job is not to make you happy.
Ideology breeds Hypocrisy. Just how much is up to you.
Be careful with this idea. Make sure at all the interviews you carefully point out that you refused to take the promotion because of the annoyance, pain and trouble it would cause you at THIS job, and don't make it sound like you don't want to be a manager in general. You may put some corporate types off if you phrase it wrong and then they'll think you are just saying "I don't want to be a manager because being a manager sucks". We know that and you know that but we don't want the suits in on it ;)
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
I could see why they would be upset to the point that they'd fire you. You're the person that knows second most in the company. They don't have to deal with the hassle of bringing someone new in and having you train them forever to learn all of the intricasies that you know already. If you work for a company, they'd also like to think that you are doing your work to better the companies position in whatever it is that they do, so taking that position would accomplish this. Don't view this as a bad deal where you have to deal with corporate politics etc., view this as an opportunity to make changes in that which you disagree with. Take the challenge, be bold and you'll be more confident in yourself and your abilities.
There's probably a ton of qualified people here who would gladly take the position.
Thank you for posting this.
I was having my own troubles dealing with actually being passed over for promotion, but reading your response helped put things in perspective. I realize that I really do like what I do, I'm good at it and getting better, and every day that I learn something new is another day that my employable value increases.
I guess that one day it will be appropriate to move into management echelons, but I think I can be happy where I am for another little while.
Thanks for the boost!
Responsibility is the punishment for compentenc
davejenkins.com |
I was in a similar situation a year ago - presented with a Management position over the merger of two Life Insurance companies (guilty parties will remain nameless), they wanted someone with the experience I had - and the determination. However, I am NOT a leader. I take my queues from others - this is not a weakness to admit your shortcomings and to stick with what your good at, it's wiseman's common sense.
Anyway, I took the position under the assurance from my supervisor's supervisor that if I didn't like the job, I could return to my previous position. Oh how that was a lie. From the time I took the job, to the time of my termination - I had gone from model employee to Satan incarnate in 3 months time... New management turned my life upside down - suddenly the expectations on me were too high, and the price of failure was absolute.
I wish I could offer more encouraging words - but if you have any opportunity - just stall. If they want an absolute answer, and you feel you can sit down with someone whose in the decision chain but NOT your supervisor - address your concerns with this person. Otherwise, you might try to stall long enough to flee that place at once! Promotions to management is always a promotion with a demotion, and your fellow employees will HATE you for it.
Now this is the best thing I've read so far, Especially the part about not burning your bridges, I've only been in Silicon Valley for 2 years and I've already seen workers who walked out the door only to find that 4 months latter there old boss works at the New job they want. (luckily it wasen't me.)
iRepairIT - iPhone, Mac, & PC Repair
You don't have the skill required for corporate climbing - hunger for power. You are content. I think they might be envying you. Anyhow, tell them that your new position will introduce new to your new job requirements that you do not work well with. As a geek, these requirements are not something you will be able to learn without compromising who you are. Furthermore, ask them why they would want a promotion from a position they are content in. Demand clear answers. Maybe they will persuade you. Maybe you can point out how you are different from them. Maybe you can even suggest to have one of your minors leapfrog? Or they introduce someone from a different department, and you do the technical part, leaving him/her with the administrativia? There are multiple possibilities. Of course, you could also go with something a bit more aggressive. What you choose, depends on the type of message you want to give them.. "Fuck off. I don't want your bullshit position".. or "Thanks, but no thanks". I would say that being a bit soft would also imply that you are not really management material. That's the message you want to give, right?
Stop the brainwash
Reminds of a conversation I had with someone at Dunkin Donuts the other day. (Actually, it was a conversation he had to me, but anyway). I was discussing my future with my mother. How soon I would be getting back into school and stuff.
This guy politely got into the conversation, and proceed to talk about all of the great opportunities there are to start my own business. Too bad we had been talking about how I don't want to be in charge of people.
He moved from me running my own business playing with computers, what I love, to running any kind of business that has a good idea. He was nice enough to throw some ideas at me, and I just smiled and nodded at him.
Many people can't understand the fact that not everybody has the same view of the "American Dream". I really don't want to own my own business. IMHO the #2 spot is the best, still get loads of money, but are not directly responsible for everything. Unless of course #1 dumps everything on you. :)
Those who don't know me, probably shouldn't trust me. Those that do know me, DEFINITELY shouldn't trust me.
What's wrong with bein happy and satisfied with where you are. You don't have to be gunning for the top guy to be an asset to your company. If you show up every day and do great work, why should you want to do anything else. If you love it, stick with it.
As for "his imperial Gatesness", well, I refuse to bite on that flamebait.
Those who don't know me, probably shouldn't trust me. Those that do know me, DEFINITELY shouldn't trust me.
There was a guy where I work who couldn't have the particular job he wanted and they moved him to something he didn't like. Heres what he did, and it worked for him. He quit, came back and put in an application, and then got hired for the position that he wanted in the first place.
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
That little comment would get the secretary fired/tranfered so fast.... Not fair, but don't think it won't happen. I dated an office bookkeeper... As a result, she got demoted to a receptionist job that she hated, and quit. I married her, and quit as well. I went to work in IT, and we lived happily ever after. :-)
I guess what I'm saying is, don't lie about something like this. If there isn't a relationship there already, don't say a word. You'll just be screwing up some poor underpaid, undereducated or underemployed person's life.
Forge is right about the ambition part though. The only way out, short of finding a new job, is to convince them of the following:
1. One of the other people in the office is a better choice.
2. You're irreplaceable right where you are.
3. They're not idiots for choosing you, just not fully informed. Pin this on the departed manager if you can, but don't push it.
For those that say, "Just get a new job". I say, what if the guy has stock options? It might force him to leave quite a bundle of cash on the table. If this were a larger company, I'd say take the promotion, and then lateral transfer out to some other division. But a small shop doesn't have the opportunity. There may be room for some concessions. Find a way to give a boost to the 2nd level manager's career/ego/whatever. Perhaps a small reorganization, where he takes most of the staff load, and you manage the "skunk works".
Temkin
Good point, but I think that if discussion does not begin the minute you say that you will leave, then don't go through the other steps of showing them other's interest in you.
If you show that you are looking for another job, and you have companies interested in you, your loyalty will be called into question from that point on if you stay after saying you'll leave.
When you make a threat "do X or I quit" to your boss, one of two things will happen:
- If he's stupid, he'll give in to your demands, or
- If he's smart, he'll say "I'm sorry that you won't be with us any more. Let me call HR and security."
So, you wind up either fired, or staying working for a stupid boss.Talk about a no-win situation.
My advice, do what you like and stick with it. The fear of being fired is real. It keeps me awake a lot. But is firing really the end of the world when I did not want the job in the first place? And if my bosses do not respect MY wishes, do I really want to work for them? Not having a job is scary but is this fear really worth trudjing to a job every day that you absolutely hate? When you could have taken a chance and obviated the problem?
There should be a compromise in your situation between you and the management. It will probably depend on how you present your side. Stay factual and level headed. Refrain from emotional statements. Spell out the plan: "Mr. Boss, I will assist you with the transition as an interim manager including searching for a new manager." Agree on an effective date for the interim manager transition -- the transition period is planned for three months. Have the boss announce the arrangement. This gives you leverage in the event that the boss does not live up to his end of the commitment. Be firm but not demanding. Never say, "I'll give you three months, or I am outta here." Remember, finding that new manager will be tough in this market. From what you describe, you have a recognized talent, maturity, and managerial capabilities. Use these skills to help you see both sides and tread that happy middle. In the absolute worst case, you find another job. I doubt you will get to the worst case. But the worst can happen, and you need to be prepared for it -- but don't make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Even though it may not seem like it, you are in the driver's seat. You can either give up the seat and go where management steers you, or you can start driving.
MyopicProwls
MyopicProwls
My homepage
... Do you really want to work for a company like that?
/*
*Not a Sermon, Just a Thought
*/
*Not a Sermon, Just a Thought
*/
Peter Principle
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
Neglecting the conspiracy theories above (you should know by now if they're at all credible), this offer of a promotion really is a compliment - it means that you're well-respected within your company, and people think you could be taking a more challenging role.
You've probably never thought of yourself as "the management type" - I suspect this is because:
- You've never had a really good manager - so you think "the management type" means "the stupids". This is often the case, but needn't be so - you have the chance to show it isn't.
- You've never had ambitions in that direction. I'm very suspicious of anyone who does harbour a deep desire to be management. Lots of good managers didn't see that as their career paths, but (when the time came) they stepped up to bat
- You're concerned that it'll be hard. You're right, it will be. You'll study, and practice, and with time you'll get good at it. Nothing worth doing was ever any other way.
To address you're specific concerns:- That the job is too political - this is because your previous manager(s) were
idiots! A good manager builds
concensus and gets buy-in from others.
That largely consists of just sitting down
talking to people. That your previous
management spent their time arguing with
other parts of the company only shows
that they hadn't done their jobs. Too
many managers think their job is to
"manage down" to their reports - when in
fact it's largely managing up (to their
bosses) and sideways, to their peers in
other parts of the company.
-
That there's too much "flak" (a "blame culture") at that level. This is because your previous managers were cretins! They didn't manage
expectations (more "managing up"), they didn't
push for adequate resources, they accepted
impossible tasks or deadlines, they de-motivated
their employees and they failed to build the
necessary relationships within the company to
make them successful.
It's a real problem in the tech industry, and in society in general, that knowlegable, compitent and well-motivated people are unwilling to take on the responsibility of leadership. That's why companies are too often run by morons, and why the world is run by lawyers.Hacking people is more fun than hacking machines.
## W.Finlay McWalter ## http://www.mcwalter.org ##
Right... So my company has every right to order me to go out to a foreign country and shoot up the locals? ;-)
Grab.
No, that's just crap management, which happens everywhere.
Grab.
Promote from within the department. The new manager will already know the technical ropes and the learning curve on the mgmt ropes wouldn't take as long as with a new guy. Then you hire a low level new guy and everybody moves up a notch.
This makes sense as far as it goes, but it doesn't address the issue - that is, they are forcing the issue with threats of termination. That is a very strong indicator that there is something else at work here, something Machiavellian and cruel. The original poster has obviously picked up on that. I'd say he should trust his instincts.
Oracle and unix guy.
Tough one. Good luck with whatever decision you make. Here's my two cents.
Start trying to find a new job. You obviously have the skills, your accomplishments should/will show that. The companies twisted logic (if you can even use the word logic) is going to make your job harder/unenjoyable, if not a year from now then in 3-4 years. I assume you're not nearing retirement (if so then maybe tough it out for the remaining time)
You could take the route of hiring a lawyer and fighting it in court, but even if you win your relationship will be permenately damaged and you'll want to leave anyway. I haven't really thought out this possibility. Just a passing thought.
I've never heard of someone being forced to move up the latter (but I'm young and naive). Corporate logic isn't really logic, more like Corporate Chaos. I don't have any "good" advice, just fair (at best) advice. Once again good luck.
This seems to be the post I agree with the most. I still disagree about the second of the 2 *'s. I agree that migrating your personal belongings home might not be a bad idea. However, generally any documents or programs done at a company are the property of the company and I have witnessed lawsuits when an ex-boss sees a program an employee wrote under him up on that employee's new webpage.
Someone else mentioned the "look at all these other offers I am getting" technique. From what I have seen this technique generally does not work. I have known people to get fired or demoted for using it.
This message is encrypted with Quad ROT-13 to protect the author's copyright under the DMCA.
And another thing...
Hiring from outside is expensive. Somebody from higher up will have to spend time sifting through applications and interviewing. If you interview 8 people that's at least a day gone, maybe two. There may be fees to pay a recruitment agency for the successful candidate.
There's also the risk involved in hiring somebody you don't know. They may be very good at job interviews and very bad at managing an IT department.
Don't forget the timescales. In the UK it's normal for somebody changing jobs to have to give one month's notice to their previous employer. If you hire from within the company, you have filled the position straight away. The person who fills the position was probably working with several other people who could cover while their replacement is sought (or not sought if the company wants to reduce headcount a bit).
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Look, there's little reason to run around flapping your arms and screaming at the rain. It doesn't seem as though you have any incentive to stay like options or something. Take the promotion and quietly find yourself a new gig. If you don't need the paycheck, just quit.
employers have too many rights and powers already, its right that employees should have rights and protection as well. if you think there is something wrong with that then thats your problem
being good at a technical job and a management job i have found are quite different, just because someone is good at one it doesn't follow at all they would be good at another. at my place our boss used to be a guy who as a programmer could maybe hack out some GW-Basic but as a manager he rocked, we also had someone who was a great programmer but when he took over a load of programmers he sucked as a boss. if someone doesn't want to be a manager then they won't make a good manager in my experience. and managers are much easier to find than good technical people.
or like i did, accept the promotion, get a few people below you into a sub-mngt role to take a lot of the responsibility then you can keep an overall eye on stuff while you pick and choose the technical jobs you want.
Maybe I'm swimming against the current here, but IMHO your company is absolutely correct. An employee is not a sovereign entity, every position involves responsibilities. And if your #1 IT dude is gone, then the entire landscape of your department has changed, and your company doesn't need or want an experienced #2 and a newbie #1. I think you're burying your head in the sand. Don't whine about dealing with "politics" etc - that's part of any position. Have you considered that this promotion would allow you to increase your skills, give you valuable experience, and even cooler, allow you to implement YOUR vision of what the IT department should look like? Do you have zero ambition, or are you just averse to responsibility and prefer to be a cubicle jockey forever?
sheesh man, I'm not your mom, but she'd tell you the same damn thing.
Don't blame me - I voted for Howard Dean. http://dean2004.blogspot.com
They are only shooting themselves in the foot if they fire you because not only can you likely sue them...
This is just stupid. This is a choice. The employer should have the right (and most courts would rule this way) to terminate employment for willful decisions made by employees. Exceptions to this include the family medical leave act and other Pro-Family measures to prevent descrimination for participation in non-job related activities. HOWEVER, choosing not to accept a promotion is most definately job related and the company is well within its rights to dismiss a person for this reason.
As another poster so rightly pointed out, refusal of a promotion can be both considered to an indication of faltering job committment as well as a perceived insult to other management. In both cases the company may be best advised to dismiss the individual.
Businesses (contrary to popular young person belief [full disclosure: I myself am a young person not suffering from this particular mental disease]) are about making money and prospering. If they're not, they should go out of business. This means the good of the whole outweighs the good of the one (no matter who he is...even if he's the CEO [which btw, happens all the time]).
While I'll agree that it is probably a poor business practice, it is NOT and SHOULD NOT be illegal or grounds for litigation.
Also, if you work in an at-will employment state (like me), no grounds are required for dismissal and the burdon of proof weighs heavily on those claiming some protected status under the law. Pretty much better be pregnant or covered by the ADA (which seems to be almost anyone nowadays).
Anyway, I just hate it when the solution to every problem is litigation. Move on. If they fire you, you probably don't want your job back. If rehire is not your goal, your suit is vengeful and should be considered frivolous as you are not entitled to the job and are compensated regularly for your work.
-fp
Maybe I wasn't clear. That's my fault.
My issue is largely with the idea that a lawsuit is an appropriate measure to take here. The legal system is a means to right aggregious wrongs, not an everyday conflict resolution system. News Flash! Sometimes things don't work out. It doesn't seem to justify litigation.
As to your final point, it is not legal to file a lawsuit under this pretext. It happens, often enough, however, because a semblance of an actual arguement can be made. It would, however, be contrary to the actual intent of the system.
The idea that something CAN be done means that it is therefore an appropriate choice is something that has long troubled me. Exercising one's perogotive is not in and of itself an inherrantly appropriate or `good' act. While the inevitable flamewars about whether or not `good' can actually be defined would likely ensue were this thread not nearly dead by slashdot standards, it remains that the point of view you forward does more (in my opinion) to damage the system, the agressor(employer?) and most certainly the victim. Lawsuits are not fun.
To each their own, I guess...but don't ask me to feel sorry for them when they get stomped.
-fp
Peter Principle
________
Whatever you do, don't use the Massachusetts principle and start shooting accounting personnel if you don't get the raise...
First of all, you should be commended for taking a happy, positive job experience over a good paying job experience. Few people today have their head screwed on right, and think about things that way. Most will jump at an opportunity such as the one you were offered. Like the saying goes in the corporate world, you will always rise to the level of your incompetence. If you are doing a great job, you will get promoted. If you are doing a lousy job, you will continue in that job you are doing lousy in while bringing the rest of the company down with you.
Why not use one of the concepts of the Peter Principle to your advantage. The concept I am talking about is called something like "creative incompetence". You pick something which is not the primary focus of your job, such as filling in your timesheet, grooming, or punctality (esp. to meetings) and do it deliberately incompetently. Something which you can't get fired for, but means that they will be unwilling to promote you any further. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/PETERPR.html
I'd say that the guy shouldn't take the promotion if he doesn't want it. He might do well at the job, but why would any company want to put a person in a position they don't want? Answer: upper management at any company is stupid (see the above principal). I hope he doesn't get fired for not taking the bump up, but honestly I wouldn't be surprised if he did. Obviously they couldn't put "Fired for not accepting a promotion" as the official reason for firing him, but that would be the real reason. The official reason would be something plausable that would stand up in court (the judge would probably be friends with his CEO anyway, judicial impartiality is a myth).
"Mission Accomplished" -- George W. Bush May 1, 2003
It wasnt that I was being forced into management, but one of the more senior people in my group was. Upper management had offered to him and we knew who would take the job if he didnt, and that was NOT an option any of us were looking for. Looking back a year later, I think I would have taken the other guy, as the person promoted from my group was the absolute WRONG person to be in charge of us.
You see, we were hardware geeks, we loved toys, who doesn't? :-) But when he had to be the one to lead us, there were a lot of mixed messages and favoritism. It led to a lot of conflict that shouldnt have been there if didnt know any of us before hand. When I quit, there was one person left from the original 5 that were there, as the rest of us had left. Coincedentally, the only person left when I quit was the one who was the boss' best friend from before the promotion. Go figure.
"See, we plan ahead! That way, we never have to do anything now."
--I must have the manager look.
--Every job I have ever had has tried to promote me to manager. When I was in sales, even at Costco (nee Price Club.)
--My current job wanted to "promote" me to manager and change my title from Sys Admin to Managing Director of IT. I told them, "No." But I did graciously offer to let them give me the title "God/Emporer of Networking" b/c I thought that would look really good on a resume'.
--They leave me alone to work on computers now. Sometimes techs ask me questions. I say "RTFM" a lot. They ask less questions. They never ask for days off or reviews though. Which is exactly what I want.
This
They say that if you don't accept the job, they'll dismiss you. But somehow I don't think an Industrial Tribunal/Court Action would accept 'Turned down promotion' as a valid reason for your sacking. If anything, now they've 'threatened' you, they are probably unable to sack you for a good year or so. If they do, pull 'em into court and cite this as an 'ultra motive'.
Richy C.
In the US, most employees are employed 'at will'. So it doesn't have to make sense if it's what management wants to do. That said, I don't blame you for not wanting to be a manager. It looks like it's time to move on.
You've got it dead wrong.
As a CEO, I must tell you that long-time employees are way cheaper than new ones.
First of all, they spent less time learning about the real working processes in the company, and building up the internal connections without no real job gets done.
Second, let's suppose you get a 15% raise every year (that, e.g., is the typical raise in my company, and that's very good for Germany). Changing jobs will often get you 50% and more. New folks get more and more expensive.
So, every long-time and satisfied employee is one of the most important assets of a company. A management that doesn't grok this isn't worth their money.
Just IMNSHO, of course. :-)
Joachim
People don't write Manifestos any more -- what's going on in this world? [Frank Zappa]
Well... duh they will get rid of their Oracle guys... probably quicker then 5 years since everyone is upgrading to SQL2000.
</SATIRENOTSERIOUS>
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
Although your post takes a balanced view, what is striking to me is the amount of hostility in many of the /. responses when there are so few stated facts. Seems like there's a lot of repressed hostility in the IT community.
I've talked to a couple of people whose employers look through monster.com to see if any of their employees are listed.
I know someone that got a PHAT raise that way. Sounds beneficial to me. I agree that anonymity of references is the right thing to do.
I would take Software Janitor's advice (the poster above), excepting the litigation; there's no need for that.
The only other advice that I would add is that (if they won't let you hire a new manager) offer to work the position for two months if they hire someone in that time, and only one month if interviews haven't started in that time. In the meantime, flood the market with your resume.
Someone mentioned a average 5 month job search for people making $50,000. This is nonsense. I make that much and have gotten all of my jobs within two or three weeks. Considering the average stay at one location in this industry is 18 months, I've beat that too, so I'm not just taking the first offer that pops up. With the one/two month plan, you should be able to find something really nice.
Don't burn any bridges, but don't turn back either. Working for people that don't recognize your humanity is pointless.
Okay, I know I can be trained to be a manager. I also know that I could do sales better than anyone in our sales department. I also know that I am an exceptional teacher and could be one of the best trainers, if not the best. I also know marketing, I *know* I would kick ass at that too. But I HATE THAT CRAP! The same goes for management positions.
I was an assistant manager before; and had all the guidance and help that anyone could ask for and it just wasn't something that I liked. In fact, I dreaded it after the initial honeymoon was over.
I have much more fun poking at software and finding bugs than I would in any of those positions (well training and marketing are fun too).
So, if you want to boot me because I love my job, fine, it's just another way for me to increase my salary more than any raise could.
Good luck fitting square pegs into round holes.
And what if the company continues it's stupidity and decides they don't need to hire a replacement, but that the new IT Manager (original poster) can do both jobs at once.
This happens all the time to small companies on limited resources. "It looks good on paper..."
Why is taking a management position always seen as "growing in your field"?
Once you've become a manager, you are no longer a Network Technician, Programmer, QA, etc. I can easily grow in my field (QA) for eons without becoming a manager.
For the actual experience rather than statistics and speculation. It should be a 5, not a 2. Thanks Modders!
I'm just curious, not an attack of any sort, but why would you post anonymously? What does it matter if your current employer knows?
Why would a company already faced with having to fill one job want to alienate the #2 guy so much that they'll then have to fill a second? Just filling those two spots could cost $40,000 or more, not to mention all the problems that go with losing the #1 and #2 guy in a company/division.
Present the argument as follows:
- I like my job very much
- I like this company
- I know the kind of work I'm good at and enjoy
- This new job is significantly different from my current job and the type of work I enjoy
- Although qualified for the job, I don't think it's what I'm best at
- I am very willing to take the position temporarily, and help find and train a replacement
The company is looking at your recalcitrance as costing them money (I'm assuming it costs less to find a #2 guy than a #1 guy), but they're looking at it wrong. Once you indicated you didn't want the job, the choice is now between finding a new #1 with a #2 around to keep things running smoothly, or finding a #1 and #2 simultaneously, and dealing with the problems of having a headless department.
I don't take the position of a lot of people on this board (i.e. "I'm an IT professional, I'll have a new job in 8 minutes. Screw you!"). I like my job a lot. The pay is good, my manager's great, I like the people I work with, the bene's are great and I work 10 minutes from home. You can bet I'd fight pretty hard to keep it.
You shouldn't take the job if you don't want it. You never want to get yourself into an employment situation where you hate to get out of bed in the morning. Why not hit the ball back into their court? Give them a counter-offer. Say you'll take the job at $50K above what they're offering, and demand a 2 year contract and a company car. Don't make it too outrageous, but make it something you're willing to live with for the term of the contract in case they agree. Request their offer in writing, put your counter in writing. If they turn down the offer and fire you, at least you have proof that they thought you were qualified for both your current job and the #1 slot and fired you in retaliation for not taking the promotion (in case you want to talk to a lawyer). And if they fire you, demand severance. Lots.
Just make sure they know that whatever they do, the cheapest, easiest course of action would be to simply start a search to fill the #1 slot with your help.
"Can I finish? Can I finish?
How about this... Go ahead and take the job, but since you'll then have an opening for your former posistion, look for a less technical managerial type to offload the ugly stuff to. You can then take the technical lead in your company, but have this other person take care of a lot of the people issues, especially the ones that report to you.
Part of their reasoning is that if I am refusing the appointment, I must not be qualified for the job
You are unwilling to take on the responsiblity which is part of the job, therefore by definition you are unqualified. Unfortunately their logic gets a little fuzzy after that. Most companies have a problem with employees who are not ambitious, and don't want to rise to their level of incompetence. To people who have the mind set that makes them leaders of companies, people who have other mind sets are incomprehensible. (If you aren't ambitious, there must be something wrong with you, or you must be just lazy, and therefore not putting a hundred percent into your job.) My suggestion is, if you are truely qualified, ie: able to take the pressure, then take the job, invest the extra money and retire early.
In a few states -- such as Massachusetts IIRC -- cause is required or the employer faces a wrongful termination suit. But specifically California is wide open on this issue. You can be fired for wearing an earring to work (a la Disney), much less refusing to accept a promotion.
-- ShadyG (NAL)
Nerd Rock In Progress
It could be you will no longer be happy where you are depending on who they bring in as manager. My company has a strong track record of making each manager worse than the one they are replacing. If you force them to do a 'cold' search, no telling who might be running your life.
Isn't that the whole argument of the peter principle? (BTW, IANA sociologist) In corporate culture, people get promoted past their level of competency. That's not exactly the case here, it's more like this person is being promoted past his/her level of comfort. Anyway, the firing part sucks, but if you work at a place that will fire you for not taking a promotion, maybe you should work elsewhere. Like Kevin Spacey in American Beauty, "I'm looking for as little responsibility as possible." If you want to read more about the Peter principle, check here
Still, with a plan, you only get the best you can imagine. I'd always hoped for something better than that. -CP
One: Why do you think you would not like being a low level manager? You get to learn how to run a team efficiently which -- if you do well -- is invaluable in your resume. When I was made a manager I was initially afraid that I wouldn't have a chance to get my hands "dirty" anymore in the trenches. Wrong. Once you get your team running well, there's plenty of time to do things you like and your team will appreciate you for still doing some "real work". Ok, you get more paperwork and you have to learn to get along with all kind of people (pointy haired ones too), but I wouldn't go back now. I'm as proud of what I have accomplished as a manager as I once was after finishing a challenging coding project. Being a manager has been mostly a pleasant experience to me, so my advice to you would be to try it.
As far as I've seen, the majority of dot com layoffs are content and marketing people, not people with technical skills. Obviously, this is just from my limited observation and anecdotal evidence. Anyone have any reliable data on this?
with humpy love,
with humpy love,
humpmonkey
"Rock over London, Rock on Chicago.
Wheaties, Breakfast of Champions"
I am currently not obliged to divulge that information as it might compromise the agents in the field
Accept the promotion then get your resume out, get another job, and resign.
If they make a counter offer you can dictate the terms.
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
The 1st. is to leave. Life's to short to be in a job you don't want.
The 2nd. choice is to talk to your CTO, or your branch manager and be honest and explain your situation. If he/she is intellingent, he/she will undersand that it is not worth loosing a quality employee who, most importantly LOVES HIS JOB. Remember, you have the upper hand here; there's a shortage of quality IT personnel in the US. It would be a shame to loose one for such ilogical reason.
If your CTO doesn't see it that way, perhaps it was time to leave any way!
There is another way you can look at this dilemma:
Perhaps you think you don't belong in a managerial position. But in a wolrd of ever changing demands, you may find that you can excel and be a good manager. Not everyone is suited to do that type of job, and it does come with its share of "diplomatic needs", but you may have some hidden talents.
Bottom line: take this as if you they brought into the office a brand new piece of hardware you've never heard of or touched, and they ask you to fix it: Learn about it... Learn from it!
Good Luck!
I've gone from being a developer to the development manager to the CTO and back to being a developer. My company has always been happy to keep me on in any position since I generate revenue for them and keep things running. If you're providing value to a company (i.e., revenue or training or whatever), then they're not going to let you go. It's possible that you're company's management is so blinded by spite that they really would fire you. If that's the case, you're better off leaving since they're likely to tank soon enough making decisions based on spite rather that good business sense.
I have a management degree. Been there, done that. I now do the network-monkey thing because I like it. If somebody wants to force me into a promotion that I don't want, fine - I'll quit. I just don't want the hassle of being "in charge"
I, too, have urged a co-worker to get out, mainly because they were worth about twice what that company was paying them, and I didn't want to stand by and see him ignorantly bleed.
Don't pick up the pho*(@)$*@&@!@ NO CARRIER
Take the position and start looking for another job. Any company that wants to push its employees around like this isn't worth working for. What is your skill set? Might want to tell the folks here about yourself; you never know where it might lead.....
Don't pick up the pho*(@)$*@&@!@ NO CARRIER
And the reason it gets tricky is that your second in command might not want your job. And you can't exactly coerce him into taking it... see also "irony."
Or there's the alternative alternative approach, which is more like a slippery slope -- help your #2 man hire an alternate #3 man, who swaps with him before he swaps with you. Of course, if he doesn't want the job, he'll want to hire a #4 to trade with...
Three months later, down in the mail room... "Hey buddy! Yeah, you! Get over to mailstop 12 pronto! You're our new IT manager. Yeah, I know you've only been here a few days, but..."
---
You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
The best thing you could do is leave on good terms and use them to your advantage. As a reference. Continue to do good work and offer your assistance after you leave.
I love the smell of Karma in the morning
Who cares if she doesn't know what she's doing because you'll just continue to do your old job anyway.
At least you can enjoy some eye candy.
I love the smell of Karma in the morning
You should never even consider continuing to work for an employer who threatens you. The amount of disrespect and disregard for your feelings -- as well as pure, plain arrogance this requires -- is enormous. Document everything carefully, get copies of all your prior annual reviews, get a new job and simultaneously go to your local state's employment law office. Get out of there, QUICK. C//
I don't know why so many people are bashing the company for this. If somebody doesn't want to take a promotion, fine. But you have to realise that this says a lot to the company.
Why would they want an employee that is unwilling to accept further job responsibility for further reward? If somebody says, "I don't want the promotion. It's my current job or nothing," the company is probably well within their rights to say goodbye to that employee.
It seems to me that iKantBelieveThis is not living in reality. If you don't want the job they would like you to do, of course they are considering dismissing you. Unless you and they stated that your job responsibilities would never change when you accepted the current position, I don't know what the problem is.
They need someone to fill a position and think iKantBelieveThis is qualified. iKantBelieveThis is unwilling to do the job, though. Why do they have any obligation to keep him in the current position after seeing that they have an employee that (in their view) has no drive or desire to do more?
-N
This happens because most of the people who are now managers LIKE being managers, and ASSUME that everyone else should like to be managers.
I ran into something similar, although not as drastic, involving a grad-school education program the company ran. Normally, one took one class per semester, but you could ask permission to take two. One semester they were giving two classes I felt were both critical, so I asked. There was a long argument because my manager simply couldn't believe I would risk a hit to my performance rating by spending so much time and effort on classes instead of doing more work that would lead to raises and/or promotions, but eventually (he was actually a pretty good manager once you got past the pro-management mindset) he realized that my goals were different than his. I got to take the two classes that semester.
I have seen other examples of this management mindset that I personally disagree with - a first line manager of a department doing VERY interesting work (compiler development) leaving that to take a job as SECOND-line manager of a department doing horrible grunt work (testing). To the managers, being a manager is the be-all and end-all, it matters not what you are managing, and anyone who doesn't want to be a manager must have something wrong with them.
In this case, try escalating it a few levels, there's a faint chance you may work you way up to someone with an ounce of brains - if that fails, pack your parachute and get ready to bail out.
Teen Angel - a Ghost Story
Contractors don't have this problem. Either A. They don't get promoted like this, or B. If they are, they can either take a big pay raise, or walk. Contracting eliminates the stress involved in 'permanent' jobs. Same duties, but more money, and no political bullshit.
It may be cheaper for them to give you a promotion and raise than to replace your boss on the open market. An added bonus is that they can fill your position with someone less qualified and cheaper, since you will still be around to pick up the slack. Given the choice between money and reason, management always goes for the green.
Ask for top dollar and the unqualified right to pick your successor. If they go for it, take the job, then use the new title to go job hunting. Remember, these aren't smart guys.
Sorry about that, I am not a fan myself, just trying to encompass a /. troll reference
...the only thing that pops into my mind is that management wants somebody to blame, and if they promote someone less 'trained' than you, he/she'll have the excuse "i wasn't prepared to face that kind of things.." just watch out they want somebody to fire at any cost (why did the old #1 went away?) and/or they were just looking for an excuse to fire you.
-- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
You missed what I was saying...
>"I have just as much "right" to steal your >money, as the Canadian government has to "tax" >me." Interesting statement. Then you would think >based upon your observations and opinions, that >if you think paying taxes is the same as >stealing, that you would renounce your Canadian >citizenship now wouldn't you?
I'm saying that whoever made Canada Canada, did not ask my permission or anyone else alive today if they could. And we have not been asked if it still is ok. Therefore no-one has the right to call me a citizen of anywhere untill I choose to be a citizen in a place that I've agreed to.
I know the ratio of reality/philosophy here is very small, but it is a valid point.
>After all, if you don't like it leave right?
In a workplace yes. When the entire planet is "owned" by someone, how can I? I have no choice. I am forced into it.
>That is your right after all, right? You live in >your country by your won free will.
That's sort of like saying I live on the earth of my own free will. If there was a hospitable place on earth that was not controlled by some group of people (government, gangs, etc.) I'd probably be there now.
>Funny how our rights don't actually match what >is practical in the real world and people know >this and exploit this to their own benefit.
This I agree with completely. And it is unfortunate. But if you agree to be exploited, you can't logically complain about it.
>And this is particularly true of business, and >is to be expected to a degree. And what is even >more interesting is the "my way or the highway" >self serving trash that is so prevelant in >todays world. A company that is a success is a >success due to the sum of it's parts. Not >because of a facist individual who acts based >upon their own egotistical nature.
This I also agree with completely.
My original point however, is that by agreeing to work for someone, you give them the right to be your boss. If you were born into slavery it would be different. If someone forced you to take a job it would be different. But if you agree to take the job you can't complain.
-... ---
Please read and think before you reply. And put your ego aside for one moment.
1. The poster of the article is not being forced to work for his boss. He agreed to it.
2. In that agreement, he gave his boss the right to be his boss.
3. At any time, for any reason, he can quit and thus retract the right that he gave up.
So what is the fucking problem?
Now to poke holes in your ramblings...
>Hey dude, even in the military soldiers are expected to refuse orders that they know are illegal.
The military is either
1. something you are forced into joining, and this, as I have mentioned, is NOT THE CASE HERE.
2. something you join voluntarily, in which case, YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO JOIN.
>Hello? What planet do you live on where food, housing, transportation, etc. is FREE?
Do you think apples, houses, feet are made from pennies, quarters, and dimes?
Ever heard of Mennonites? Amish? Nomads? People who make what they need to survive? If you need food, go to a garbage can outside of McDonalds. If YOU CHOOSE that that's not good enough for you, then get a shitty job and shut up. Once again NO ONE IS FORCING YOU.
>Funny, but every time I walk out of some dipshit's office because he was trying to "boss" me, I end up getting a better job at higher pay! Maybe I'm a more valuable person for having a functioning moral compass, eh? And I don't mean being a conservative religious nut either, just knowing what is OK and what is BS and not wanting to be involved in BS.
No problem No one want's to be involved with BS. And as I've said the whole time, the author of the article is free to leave whenever he wants.
>If I was born into slavery I would be out revolutionizing.
As you should be. That is why I said that case was different. BECAUSE YOU ARE FORCED INTO IT.
>In today's society I perform that role by calling assholes like you on your bullshit.
My "bullshit"? All I've said is if you're in a situation by free choice and you don't like it then leave or shut up. And furthermore, before you accuse me of being an asshole, read and think about what I'm saying, and then study my entire fucking life history. Don't just assume I'm an asshole because I use logic I'n my arguements while you use your opinion.
I'll have you know that thinking about M$'s or the MPAA's or the AMA's or whever's abuse of morals makes me feel physically ill. I fucking hate it. I hate assholes. That has absolutely nothing to do with this arguement. If you had read what I've been saying, that should be crystal clear.
>How about this timeless classic: A gentleman does not lie, cheat, or steal; *nor tolerate those who do*.
I do not lie. I do not cheat. I do not steal. I do not tolerate those who do. But once again, you have managed to insert material which is completely out of context.
I enjoy a good debate over social/political issues, but only with someone who constructs relevent, well thought out arguements.
Please do so if you wish to continue this discussion.
-... ---
You are confusing government with soceity.
The reason the land you are standing on is "owned" by anyone, is because it was taken and kept with force.
I for example, had no choice in being born in Canada. I never agreed to give control to any governing power of any country, and there is no place on earth I can go that is not controlled by someone. FURTHERMORE I never agreed to give any lawyer, judge, officer, or politician the power they have. (I do not vote.) So any power anyone thinks they have over me was not something I gave them EVER IN ANY WAY. They have forced it upon me.
The same way they would force it upon me if I wanted to start a business. They do not have the right. The have the power.
To summarize, no one can have the "right" to do something to a person that that person has not agreed to. I have just as much "right" to steal your money, as the Canadian government has to "tax" me. They do however have the power.
Now, if you go work for someone out of your own valition you are saying "I will work for you".
BIG DIFFERENCE FUCKWIT.
-... ---
the business
and anyone who is voluntarily a member
any way the owner pleases, no matter how immoral, insane or otherwise "wrong". They own the business. Period. No one has to work for them, no one has to do business with them.
-... ---
Up or out.
We have a great organization, and I just took over my department. My boss got promoted to lead the division and she asked that anyone interested in taking over should go see her. I am the second in the department so I walked into her office and told her. Her answer: "I am glad you did, because you are the main candidate for the promotion."
Instead of throwing me to the lions she gave me a couple months to learn the added duties/responsibilities/etc. My promoion came through on the exact day she promised.
There are two problems here. First, employees don't want more responsibilities. I have to promote somebody to my old position or I will have to hire from the outside. The only qualified person to take over my old job has a rotten attitude towards supervisory jobs, so I can't promote him. That means I either promote one of the guys that is half as qualified, or I hire an outsider.
The second problem is that managers don't train their assistants to be able to take over their job. If you are a manager you should cross train your people to take over some of your responsibilities. That keeps you from trying to do everything instead of just manage your people.
If you don't take a promotion in my team I will make sure it shows on your next review as a refusal to take on more responsibilities. We do web development. If you want to spend the next 10 years doing web development instead of progressing to team lead and manager then you better go freelance because we can't afford to raise your salary for these 10 years while you keep doing the same job.
Pedro
Pedro
----
The Insomniac Coder
Pedro
Pedro
----
The Insomniac Coder
Take the offer. You and anyone else in the world, can only do so much in a day. If your falling down with your new set of responsibilities.....then you will either be replaced and demoted....or let go altogether. If you can manage to NOT let the stress bother you.....then you will at least have a spiffier resume and a pay increase to work with while your looking for another job. I have found that todays management structure has NO FUCKING CLUE about how to deal with IT people. We are like no other class of worker they have ever had to deal with in the past....and therefore...they are not really suprised when we make strange demands. As an IT manager for a small distributorship...I am the whole MIS deptartment....chief, cook and bottlewasher. I am understaffed....underpaid...and overworked. But I have the run of the mill and management rearely argues with me or denies me what I need to get an individual task completed. A lot of things fall through the cracks in my shop....but I always turn to management and explain to them how ignorant they are...and they walk away with their tails between their legs. Its a beatiful world. Good Luck.
At both of my two most recent jobs, I ended up leaving in a situation where some people were completely dependant on my work and praising it (thus feeling utterly depressed about my leaving the company for somewhere else), while others who were at key Management positions basically seized the opportunity for personal vengeance.
Guess which one of these two groups gets to provide (bad) references to future potential employers? Yep, the one that made sure that my departure would be a bridge-burning session...
About the "start moving personal belongings home and making copies of usefull creations you have made there" part, bear in mind that some companies expressely own anything and everything you create while working for them, thus making copies for yourself might be illegal or, in some countries, can even be considered on par with theft.
Better check with a copyright lawyer upfront, before signing any future contract, to ensure that you are allowed to recycle your own code elsewhere, or at least that you own the concepts behind them, without ending up with a costly lawsuit or in jail.
--
Software is not supposed to be about how to work around a useability issue. - Ken Barber
From where I sit, GOOD IT managers are few and very far between. It sounds like you're a pretty grounded individual and the uppers know it. We all wish we could have good managers, but we don't want the job to be a good manager to others. God forbid we actually try to help our fellow techie. Sounds like the typical cliche comes into play here -- if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. If you want to be a grunt and keep answering to a manager that's one rung up on a Box of Hair on the evolutionary ladder, fine, and stop your whining. If you actually want to make a difference, do something and stop your whining. Either way you're going to cry foul, I believe.
You could probably get a better job at another company, so take the IT manager job and rake in the extra cash while sending out your resume. Good luck.
It's not a free country, but it's down to half price.
If the managers are so stupid that they do not recongize good talent than take the time off to look for a group of managers that you are willing to work fo.
OK, maybe you don't think of the US Navy as being a company, but they have the same policy. If a recruit doesn't advance to E-4 (often starting as E-1 to E-3) within 4 years, he is not eligible for re-enlistment. This was the same bunch that later released thousands of Navymen after the fall of the Soviet Union. Clearly, the Navy does not feel that it faces a serious worker shortage (though they always want a lot of new recruits). Not only do you have to advance up the paygrades (E-1 to E-4), you also have change the type of job you are doing (otherwise, you won't make the advancement requirements). There was some debate as to the value in forcing someone who enjoys his job as a Navy truck driver into taking a desk job, for example. Things may be a bit different in the IT world (for a while), because the job market is a little bit tight. I just read that about a half-million IT jobs went unfilled last year. Maybe 800 000 IT jobs will be unfilled this coming year. Demand is greatly outstripping supply in some areas (of course, I don't really see that in my field, but someone somewhere is making big bucks off this situation). So, your company may be taking a big risk in losing you. Oh, that reminds me. My current company forced several techs to take supervisor jobs, including one man who fought it every step of the way. These things happen when a department is stressed in some way. In our case, the department's efforts were too little, too late; we don't need new supervisors in this department, anymore. Your department might be facing the same situation.
Taking stuff apart since 1969 (TM)
Do they really need a reason to fire someone in the US? :)
It seems that everybody is only considering two options (in general), either you quit or you keep, somehow, your position.
Haven't it crossed your mind to accept it? At least for a while. There are some gains on it:
- It is a step that eventually everyone takes. It is difficult to stay in the technical field forever specially when technology changes so fast and there are willing young people better prepared than you in those fields. It will not happen now, nor in 5 even 10 years. But it is a step you will have to take anyway.
- In the software development process there are many steps. Managing a project gives you a point of view that you lack when you just develop. I think the experience can be valuable.
- From what everyone is saying it seems likely that you will change your job anyway. Why not giving it a try?
- It is a new experience, you might end liking it and all. If you don't, well, you can always find a new job.
My advice: try it, you have nothing to loose and an unknown amount of things ( > 0) to win. Its a win-win situation.
I was presented with a very similar situation last December. My former boss was resigned by our CIO due to a personality conflict. I was ordered to take his place as Open Systems Manager. Not only did I like my job the way it was, I also respected and liked my resigned boss. Ahh, what to do two weeks before Y2K? I spoke at length to my resigned boss and his response was take it or get the hell outta there. Refusing the promotion and not quitting outright would be careericide. Accepting would also be dangerous due to the vastly less secure and highly political nature of an IT management position. I accepted and was promoted, and promoted again six months later to N.Am Open Systems' manager for our multi-billion dollar company. Was it a wise choice? Hmm... the jury is still out on that one. I both enjoy and despise the position. I like the IT strategic planning, systems integration and technical leadership roles. I despise the meetings, paperwork and especiailly the waning technical skills that result from management labors. One thing I've done that has greatly helped my psyche is to insist on continuing in the on-call rotation. This forces me to keep up technically and keep my fingers delightfully dirty in the bits and kernels. Sure, the money is better and I've greater respect from my family. I enjoy the personal challenge and new skills I must use as well. However, I continue to envy the hell out of the folks in my team that get to focus on pure technology implementation and needn't worry about political jockeying, executive fragging, juggling meeting schedules and flying to corporate exec pow-wows and other monumental wastes of time. I suppose I'll give it another year or two and see how it goes. So far, though, it's been a pretty cool ride. The sweet house and paid off new car don't hurt either. - Schmedley
I've tried this tactic twice in the past and both times I've ended up moving.
Of course, it could be that I'm crap at my job and they're happy to see me go. :-) My personal opinion is that some fuckwit managers decide that you're due for a promotion, and their mind is made up- if you challenge the assumptions of fuckwit managers, they see this as rebellion and are happy to let you go.
Luckily I've always been able to find a better job all round every time.
There ARE good managers out there. Sometimes things like this don't happen.
--
Andrew Oakley - www.aoakley.com
"Most senior management will buy the story if you explain it to them in these terms, otherwise it may appear that you are simply a hidden slacker unable to take responsibility for the "natural development" of your career and hence must be "irresponsible by nature" and therefore (by extension) unable to do any job responsibly by default (refer to the second most difficult thing above)."
While I personally do agree with most of your points, I would like to offer a possibility for another perspective.
I would suggest that the next time you are in a good video store you rent "The Dawn Patrol". [Warning - plot spoiler]. I don't remember the characters offhand, but there was a captain who was responsible for "managing" a wing of WWI flyers. "Managing" in this context basically meant deciding who would be sent out to their deaths, particularly the newbies. There was also a lieutenant who was the best flyer in the wing, but who was constantly giving his commander enormous amounts of Dilbert-style grief about what an incompetent idiot he was, how his flying skills had deterioriated, how he didn't have the courage to stand up to the higher-ups and make the tough decisions, etc. etc.
There are two keys points in the movie: the paired looks of glee on the face of the captain and shock on the face of the lieutenant as the captain gives the lieutenant his captain's bars and turns over command of the wing; and the look of horror on the (new) commander's face when he realizes he is going to have to assign his brother (a newbie) to a mission that will mean certain death.
I guess the point here is, if you are truly content to just be a technical contributor, then that's fine. But if you are sitting on the management sidelines, quoting Dilbert at every staff meeting, perhaps there is a reason why upper management is insisting on an "up or out" policy.
sPh
- According to some corporate cultures, a person who is not progressing in "rank" is seen as stagnant, and therefore a loser. This is actually codified in the military (at least the US military) and is prevalent in professional services firms where you can make partner. (Law firms, accounting firms, "consulting" firms like McKinsey and BCG).
- If you don't promote someone to a more leveraged position, it's difficult to cost-justify paying them more each year. In theory, a management position allows you to leverage your expertise by helping less-senior people do the job your doing now. Economic factors may cause your position to become more valuable, but barring those externalities, your intrinsic value to the company isn't changing if you don't move up. You need to be prepared to get a small or zero raise if you stay in one role.
That said, consulting/account firm PricewaterhouseCooopers, a venerable practitioner of "up or out," did a study a couple of years ago and figured out that it cost them $50K, on average, to punt a perfectly good employee just because he or she didn't fit the next higher promotion level. This issue is particularly accute in these kinds of companies because as you progress from "Manager" to "Senior Manager", your role changes from "person who does work" to "person who sells work." I'm willing to bet that a lot of people who read Slashdot would cringe at the thought or going from project participant to salesbot. Anyway, PwC is trying to tackle the issue as are other "up or out" organizations, inlcuding the US military.Anyway, I agree with the posters urging you to tell your company that you don't want a permanent promotion. Point out the cost of filling your job as well as the management position. Give them a deadline or they may "forget" that your position is temporary.
As an aside, although the consulting firms are ultimately geek-unfriendly, they can be great experience for a couple years, particularly starting out.
it sounds like you work for a firm that doesn't seem to care much for its employees... I understand that job security is important to everyone, but why would you want to even be put into a situation like this. "take it or be fired." option #3 sounds great. get the fax machine running, gonna be doing a resume send...
.02
Just my worthless
You say that you're one of several IT support people. Do the others know the situation? Imagine how they might feel. Not only do they lose a (hopefully) experienced manager, but they're likely to lose the next most experienced person at the same time. This means overtime and a basic drop in moral. I don't envy the people in the company I'm about to leave, they're in an even worse position and some of them don't even know it.
Remember, this crap is the crap you know about and you have some limited control over it. For all you know another bad IT-related decision is also currently being made that you don't know about. Even if it isn't happening now, it could at any time. Go find a nice job that doesn't treat skilled IT staff like workers on a factory floor...
I have to go look for a new job, which I will likely find within 30 days.
Unless you've already found that new job, don't be so sure of that.
The statistics last time I checked (which was admittedly a couple of years ago) were that on average, the length of time it took to find a new job in this field was close to your old salary divided by 10,000 in months.
In other words, if you're making $50,000 a year now, the average is 5 months to find a new job.
This probably only holds true in the $20,000 to $90,000 range, but I don't know exactly what the range was. I do know that the assumption was that you were looking for another job in the same range of pay.
-
Personally, I would do this:
Take the promotion, but negotiate a nice raise "for the extra responsibility and unpaid time I'll have to put in."
Update my resume, now showing that I have management experience.
Start looking for CIO jobs with startups, sticking it out in the management job until I found them.
In the meantime, I'd simply budget my time so that I kept my hand in technically. There's no reason you can't, and now you get to decide who does what when.
Also, you undoubtedly have had bad managers in the past at some point in your life (if you're like me, more often than not), so now's your chance to find out if your own ideas for management work. If they do, you might convince other managers to work that way, and affect some positive change in your organization. Or somebody else's.
I work for FedEx Services, and we have some managers here who are ass-deep in the technical side, and others who think RAM is a product of the Daimler Chrysler corporation.
I personally know one guy who was a manager for about a year, didn't like it, and got himself a peaceable demotion to a technical advisor position in which he is gleefully happy. Only now, he's got management experience on his resume, which is a big help in getting technical lead positions at many companies.
In other words, if your company is trying to give you lemons, make lemonade.
-
I've found a bit of a bimodal distribution in my own experience. If you are a techie in a hot field, you literally can walk out of one job into another. However, if you are laid off and have to start looking, or especially if you try something else for a period of time, the one month per 10K formula can be fairly accurate. It really can seem to make no sense when that happens to you, especially if you are 40something with financial obligations.
We can all find anecdotes that violate any rule of thumb. In the misty past, I remember getting fired from a $19,000 job and having a new one lined up before I reached my car in the parking lot, then quitting that $26,000 job a year later and taking 4 months to find my next one, which was for considerably more money.
-
The whole dotcom stock bubble is going to wreak terrible havoc on the economy. The next ten years will be as major a dislocating event as the Great Depression was. It will redefine what it means to be an American, and probably not for the better.
This actually applies to anyone who's reading this: if you need to switch jobs, do so now.
I completely disagree. If you move now, the company you move to may start laying off the less-senior employees in six months.
If you wait until *AFTER* the bust, any company that hires you is probably counting on building, not shrinking, and has probably already cleaned house.
-
you totally just made that up
On the 1% chance that you aren't trolling, I'll respond.
I got my figure from one of the trade rags. It's been so long I don't remember which one, but it could have been Network World, or Computerworld, or possibly Information Week. One of the crappy non-technical ones.
-
The Dilbert Principal is actually an update to the Peter Principal. They are quite different.
The Peter Principal is when someone is promoted until they reach a job that they can't do.
The Dilbert Principal, on the other hand, is the notion of taking the *least* productive engineers and promoting them where they can do the least harm, namely Management.
As the poster describes it, his situation sounds like the Peter Principal. But we only have his side of the story. It may be that management doesn't see him as a good engineer and wants to hire a better engineer and really just wants to promote him to management to make room for the new engineer.
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
Hey there buddy-- wish I could email you directly about this, but what the heck. Here's my all-knowing opinion on what you should do with your career.
I was in a similar position about 15 months ago. Guy who mentored me my first two years with the company was downsized by upper management, and middle management was in a crunch. I knew enough to be dangerous, and the stuff I didn't know was fairly well documented on a big fat network drive somewhere.
I was skeptical that I was up to the challenge. I was happy being an "apprentice;" I didn't want to me the guy who was accountable to higher management. I didn't really think I could do everything. Fortunately, our immediate manager understood the situation and set my expectations pretty well-- he didn't expect the world right away; only that I give it a go and see how it went.
Well here I am, a big fat promotion later, and I'm much better off for it. I don't know the specifics of your situation, but this could be the so-called "blessing in disguise."
Maybe one man CAN make a difference-- in your case, do the job as best you can, and manipulate the system (bureaucracy sucks, I know; I work in a 30,000 employee company) locally as much as possible, while balancing what's best for your employees and best for the corporation in total.
See if you can do it, and if you cant... well, as many others have suggested, you'll probably have another job in no time.
Best of luck!
SlashSigTheorem: Humorous, Political, Critical, Constructive- If you have a
Tell them that you are prefectly satisfied in your current position and do not wish the promotion. If they say that you will be fired if you do not take the position, ask them for good and legal reasons why you might be fired, intimating that they may have to show cause in court at a later date. Make sure you have copies of all your employee reviews (which I am assuming are excellent). Then wait for them to fire you. After they do, select from the dozens of good job offers I am sure await you in the job market.
Then sue the pants off your previous employer.
-josh
As a CEO, you really should get hip to this thing we call "sarcasm", 'cause that's what the previous poster was using.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Normally, the link is http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/faqs/hacker.html, but IBM just bought a copy, so it's currently sitting at http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/su-s e2.html.
(I enclose the old link in case this article survives past the 30-day exclusive publication period.)
You might also want to read the other side of it, the Manager FAQ. The URL will eventually be http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/faqs/manager.html, but IBM paid for the writing, so it's currently sitting at http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/su-s e.html.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Right now I could go out and have probably a half dozen good offers in the next week. I'm good at what I do, but its not like I believe I'm god's gift to the IT industry either. I think that most skilled technical people are in about the same position as me if they know where to look and who to talk to.
I've got headhunters calling me all the time, and while I am not looking for another job (I am actually changing jobs with the new year already, for a job I wasn't really looking for), I never completely shut doors with headhunters unless they do something to really piss me off -- in general I give them a polite brush-off with a 'maybe later'. You never know when you'll need them, either to find a new job for yourself (or a friend of yours) or to find a new co-worker.
Another thing to do if you are in a hurry to find a job is post your information on an internet job site (like dice.com for example). If you've got skills and you live in an area (or are willing to relocate to an area) that has IT jobs you will likely have lots of calls from companies and headhunters.
Yes, you can sue them. You may not win, but you can almost always sue. In many states this kind of action would likely be in enough of a grey area as far as a "wrongfull termination" suit is concerned. Even if the guy had signed a contract that states something like "at will" employment, that can often be challenged in court.
Note that I am not in favor of frivilous lawsuits, but the reality is that it isn't that difficult to find a lawyer who will file a lawsuit for you in a case like this.
This is just stupid. This is a choice. The employer should have the right (and most courts would rule this way) to terminate employment for willful decisions made by employees.
True up to a point, however this is a decision that is being thrust upon the employee by an arbitrary decision by the company, not something they are choosing willingly. Many people have been successful in wrongful termination suits because the employer effectively forced them out by 'materially changing compensation or job terms and responsibilities' to something that wasn't acceptable. In most of those cases the former employee only got a small amount, but it happens pretty frequently.
Exceptions to this include the family medical leave act and other Pro-Family measures to prevent descrimination for participation in non-job related activities. HOWEVER, choosing not to accept a promotion is most definately job related and the company is well within its rights to dismiss a person for this reason.
Maybe, maybe not. Doesn't mean you still can't sue. Doesn't mean you'll win either, but in either case the company loses because they are out legal fees plus their time.
As another poster so rightly pointed out, refusal of a promotion can be both considered to an indication of faltering job committment
That is pretty wacked thinking even for PHBs.
as well as a perceived insult to other management.
Perception is in the eye of the beholder, but anyone who thinks this way would seem to have some serious problems with their self esteem.
In both cases the company may be best advised to dismiss the individual.
Perhaps, but what I was saying is that it is pretty stupid to fire someone on such shaky grounds for several reasons. It also shows a lack of communication on management's part, because I would never have made an offer for a promotion to someone unless I was pretty sure ahead of time it is something they would want. I'd certainly never try to force someone into a promotion they didn't want.
Businesses (contrary to popular young person belief [full disclosure: I myself am a young person not suffering from this particular mental disease])
I am not a young person, nor do I suffer from that particular ailment. My points were that it was a bad idea to get rid of an employee for a reason like this because of the potential downside to the employer dealing with a lawsuit, be it successfully defended or not.
are about making money and prospering. If they're not, they should go out of business.
Part of being successful is avoiding stupid decisions that can land you in court.
This means the good of the whole outweighs the good of the one (no matter who he is...even if he's the CEO [which btw, happens all the time]).
Life just isn't that simple. While CEOs get sacked all the time, they are usually given a 'golden parachute' just to keep them from suing, and even then sometimes it doesn't work.
While I'll agree that it is probably a poor business practice, it is NOT and SHOULD NOT be illegal or grounds for litigation.
I didn't necessarily say it should be illegal, but it certainly could be grounds for litigation.
Also, if you work in an at-will employment state (like me), no grounds are required for dismissal and the burdon of proof weighs heavily on those claiming some protected status under the law. Pretty much better be pregnant or covered by the ADA (which seems to be almost anyone nowadays).
As I've said before, just because a case wouldn't be easy doesn't mean it can't be filed.
Anyway, I just hate it when the solution to every problem is litigation.
Again, I agree up to a point. I am not for frivilous litigation, however, I also don't think there should not be any recourse for people at all in any circumstance. The question is where to draw the line.
Move on. If they fire you, you probably don't want your job back. If rehire is not your goal, your suit is vengeful and should be considered frivolous as you are not entitled to the job and are compensated regularly for your work.
While I would agree that in most cases, rehires after a lawsuit are not going to work, there does need to be some way that companies can get spanked when they terminate people for illegal reasons. I'm not saying that for sure that would apply in this case, but I am speaking just generally. Of course the amounts received by the plaintiffs should be reasonable (limited to reasonable damages such as costs related to finding a new job, unemployment benefits, etc), and if punitive damages are assessed against a company, they probably shouldn't go to the plaintiff or his lawyers, they should go to offset the government's costs in administering and enforcing employment law. Basically there should be enough incentive to file groundful suits but not a lot of 'free money' to make ambulance chasing plaintiff's attourneys file every case they can dig up.
Even if a plaintiff knows they probably can't win a case if they are willing to eat their own attourney's fees they can 'punish' a former employer by making them pay their legal fees and lost time, etc. dealing with a case. Right or wrong, that is the way the system works.
Getting fired for refusing a promotion would
make a simple case of constructive dismissal
under UK employment law.
Also, less than a year later I went to the boss and said "Damnit I want my own direct reports. I'm managing this crew anyway, but it sucks to not have any officially seniority on paper." So now I've got reports. Who knows, you might find that management isn't as bad as you think it is.
Duane
www.HearMySoulSpeak.com
You may want to ask them: your number one guy left, and now you are going to fire your number two guy? How smart is that?
I think you have some serious negotiating room.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Management thinks that all people, like them, actually want to become managers. I recall leaving a job, one of the reasons given is that there isn't any room for growth. "But there's plenty of opportunity to become management here!" You can imagine the shock and annoyance on the suit's face when I explained that I was talking about technical growth, and I had no interest in management.
Today, I have prevented getting myself in such a position by directly telling my management that a management position does not interest me. Explaining from a management point of view helps (want to stay directly in the details, that sort of thing). It works.
They'll probably explode after reading it. Hmmmm... maybe you'd want to hold of presenting it until the exit interview.
That comment is dead on! Just because you *can* do something well does not mean that you would enjoy it.
There is nothing wrong with persuing a technical career. Really, "management track" is no more or less valid than "technical track" and I would think twice about working for managers who delude themselves into thinking that management is the natual progression for any successful career. I would also think twice about working for managment that has no concern for the career asperations for thier employees and think that it's a good idea to *force* someone to switch from a tech job to a management job. I don't see how this company can expect a good outcome from that little ploy.
The comany is obviously trying to bluff and painting themselves into a corner in the process. They are far better off with their senior IT guy than without him (or her), but they want him take the management job. But instead of accepting that not everyone want to be in management (and perhaps even realizing that there may be reasons why no one wants to do management at that company), instead they push forward with some ego-driven bluff to force the senior IT guy to do their bidding. It's a classic 1950's sitcom move ( I always think of Mr. Cogswell of the Jetsons), and a very stupid move. If they get their way, they have an unhappy, reluctant manager who may be too depressed to do a good job. If not, they are now forced to fire an otherwise excellent employee for subordination, if he doesn't leave first.
No matter what, iKantBelieve would be better off looking for a new job. It would be prudent to grin and bear it at the existing job until he/she is ready to heave on his/her own terms, but ultimately, there are other companies that would be more compatible with iKantBelieve's long term career goals.
- bridgette
I'm sure you are right about what the management is thinking. The fact that they are dead wrong probably will never come to their attention.
IMHO, after working for various managers for the past 25 years, good management skills are as rare as good technical skills. The difference is that management skills can't be detected as easily as technical skills. Assuming you can turn any techie into a good manager is as silly as assuming you could turn any manager into a competent Java programmer.
This company should be grateful that the employee in question knows his limits, and doesn't want to be promoted to a job he can't handle in the long term. (See THE PETER PRINCIPLE for a further discussion of this problem). But they aren't; I agree he should probably find another job.
Generally speaking, the companies that pull stupid shit of this nature aren't places that you actually want to work. The company that wrote me up for "intimidating my co-workers" (probably because I'd rather work than gossip) and the one that let me go for some fairly spurious reasons (long story) paid horribly and had relatively nasty working conditions. Three days after I was fired by one of those places, I had a much better job with more money and a saner environment.
If they are stupid enough to fire you with this kind of reasoning, they deserve what they get.
"Somebody exploded a letter-bomb today
Excellent post.
This applies to most fields, not just CS.
A biology professor I know said that this exact problem is why he chose to teach rather than following his original dream of becoming a park ranger. He knew that in a few years he would be promoted right past doing the work he loved.
I once worked under someone who was "promoted" into management mostly on the strength of her excellent technical abilities. But she wasn't a good herder of cats, and she suffered in this position until she was instead given an "expert analyst" position with a similar pay scale but no managerial duties.
I also once worked under someone who supervised engineers, and did it reasonably well, without being an engineer herself.
Management skills and advanced skills for one's actual job are not the same thing. They aren't even related, most of the time. Assuming that they are is a VERY bad move. Now, this is not to say that the department expert shouldn't be lending a hand to the newbies; s/he certainly should be! However, expecting the expert to be an expert manager as well as an expert programmer (or park ranger, or financial analyst, or whatever) makes no sense. The skills aren't the same.
"Somebody exploded a letter-bomb today
Well, no. Ambition is not the same thing as excellence. You need both to make a great company, but not necessarily in the same person. In fact, large numbers of excellent specialists who prefer to become more excellent, rather than move up the corporate ladder, is actually a considerable asset.
If the boss confuses lack of ambition for lack of responsibility. It is possible for someone to be extremely responsible for their job and to their company, without being responsible for subordinates.
Being the kind of manager who wants to see ambition in all his employees because he himself was ambitious, does not make one a good manager -- it makes one an insecure, neurotic fsck who needs to be surrounded by carbon copy minions, and who puts one's own ego gratification before the good of the enterprise.
-*- Any technology indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced -*-
Good heavens, why is this mod'd up to "insightful"?? If what this employee wants out of his job is such a calamity to his employeer -- "business cannot afford to keep on people that cannot grow with the business, and you can be sure that when they hired you, they thought you had the ability to grow, or they would not have hired you." -- then how is going to "find a job somewhere else" feasible, plausible, desirable or useful?
If it is possible for a different company to hire him on the basis that he's not interested in managing for them, then it's quite possible for is current employer to cope with the same reality.
And what's with this "selfish" nonsense? He's not working for this company out of a sense of charity -- he's there for the pay. Why is a company looking after its bottom line considered perfectly decent and acceptible, but for an employee to look after his own bottom line is a moral failing? What an absurd double standard.
-*- Any technology indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced -*-
Bottom line: you have no future there. Accept that and plan your departure. If you quit, you get thirty seconds of warm glow for standing up to the bastards. Followed by n weeks of sitting at home playing freecell/quake with no money coming in.
Plan B says ask for the ultimatum in writing so that you can more completely understand your position. Then, whether or not you get the paper, decline the promotion. You will still be fired, but you will be eligible for unemployment benefits. As a plus, future bosses will appreciate an employee who is not a threat to their job.
Plan C (to be executed concurrently with your choice of A or B): start looking for a new job immediately. You are now the walking dead; beyond your sell-by date; a trouble-maker who can't be counted on; a non-team-player; an obstruction to "our path to the future". Get out.
The important thing to understand is that the job you were doing and enjoyed is a thing of the past. You have now entered the twilight zone called "they want you gone". The only thing you can do is leave in a controlled manner.
OK, plan D: offer a counter-proposal; you will save them the trouble of firing you if they will make a exit package of, say, six months salary and a letter stating you were laid off for lack of work. You won't get either, but it might be fun to watch somebody's face turn red while you ask.
Courage. There is a better world out there. Write when you find it.
I would avoid threats. Rather present your reasons for not wanting the job, in ways the management can understand. For instance, mention that you want to develop more experience within your group before moving up to a manager position. Perhaps it is a bad time in your project's cycle to pull you away from a close involvement.
You mentioned that you are not adverse to it, as long as its short-term. Let them know that you wouldn't be adverse to taking a similar promotion in the future, after you have had more time to mature in your group. Make the case that you are still a "team player" and by keeping you in your current position the company gains more than in promoting you. Then look on the temp "promotion" as a way of learning if management is really as bad as you thought, perhaps if you can be a manager in your company and not give up the technical work you want to do. What you saw the past manager do, does not define the job.
Eric Nielsen
Just be sure to do it quickly -- the tidal wave of ex-dotcommers is coming soon, and will make finding technology jobs that much harder. The fact that only 10% of them will be qualified for the jobs they're getting won't matter much; most employers hiring tech workers don't know the difference. (Think MCSE.)
Your management is making a very bad decision for their company by promoting you to a position you don't want to be in. Giving someone a job they don't want, especially one as important as an IT manager, guarantees that job will be done poorly and will cause many more headaches than it may seem to solve in the short run.
Of course, you might also consider that they really don't want you around, and this is just a creative way of getting rid of you. :-)
Twentyfive years ago my employer (a corporation which had divisions in several cities) sent me to Mexico as a temporary member of a new management team. Up until then I had been an engineer but since they knew I spoke Spanish they asked me to take the job even though I had never done production management (or any management, for that matter). The temporary job was to last for six months during which I was to select and train a Mexican replacement.
Four months into the job (during which I had tripled production over the previous idiots who had been managing that place) they told me that my old job had been "eliminated" and I should just stay there. Since my wife had a good job back home and we owned a nice house on a good bass fishing lake, I didn't take this well.
I reacted two ways. First of all I sent out resumes. Then I made sure that everyone I talked to in the Company heard the story. Since I had traveled to many Divisions in order to secure orders/parts for the Mexican Division, I had made quite a few new contacts. Soon the managers in these Divisions found their personnel reluctant to take temporary jobs outside their area.
Two weeks after being told my job was eliminated, I received a telephone call from them saying it was all a mistake and I had my old job back. I promoted my foreman to Production Manager and returned home in the six months time period.
Three months later I accepted a new job from one of the companies to which I had sent resumes. The new job paid twice the salary and offered many more benefits. When the Chief Engineer learned I was leaving he said, "you are prostituting yourself".
"No, John" I replied, "we all prostitute ourselves... I'm simply changing pimps."
No one ever had to evacuate a city because the solar panels broke!
Well I did it mainly because I wanted to be sure to hide the address/phone info of my references, who I didn't think would appreciate having their stuff posted on the Internet. I've talked to a couple of people whose employers look through monster.com to see if any of their employees are listed.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
And then be the Bastard IT Manager from Hell while you look for a new position. Post your resume anonymously (you can have it conceal your contact information and redirect mail to you) on monster.com and you'll be up to your ears in recruiters within a day or two. You can get just the job you're looking for (Hold out for a $10K or so a year raise, too :-)
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
You need to grow. The company that you work for needs you to grow. Businesses need people that are willing to take on new challenges as the business takes on new challenges. The business has invested time, money & training in you. So now it is payback time, they want more productivity out of you. A business cannot afford to keep on people that cannot grow with the business, and you can be sure that when they hired you, they thought you had the ability to grow, or they would not have hired you. If you refuse the promotion now, it means that they made a mistake when they hired you, and it will be time for them to admit the mistake, and replace you with someone that CAN grow to the position. It comes down to some old cliches: "Are you a team player?" , "Can you think outside the box (Or your cubicle)" , "Do you have the right stuff". If not, go find a job somewhere else, and let someone with desire to grow take your job. Remember, a rut is just a grave with both ends open.
Many on /. are anti-corporate by nature-- some from experience, others are still in school and get that from academia's generally anti-corporate outlook. There is a great deal of merit in some of the critiques-- in others, not so much. I personally think that corporations are the best mass social institution in history-- better than bureaucratic governments (their immediate predecessors), monarchies (similar, but with the wonders of heredity mixed in), or theocracies. There is much we don't like about them, but until there is something better, they are great to have.
iKantBelieve states in the part 'below the fold' (not in the headline) that when he refused the offer, they told him they would fire him if he didn't take the promotion, because this would demonstrate that he was 'unqualified'.
There are times when this is legitimate-- when you hire someone, you sometimes want a person who agrees in advance to the promotion (for instance, if you know that their boss will leave in six months). In that case, you put that on the table when the job offer is made.
As this was described, without reading anything into it, making this threat is improper. It may be ok from a legal point of view, but it is a shitty way to treat employees, and I know if I were put in a situation like that, I would be out as soon as the new offer came in. Not only because such a threat is in and of itself bad, but also because it is a symptom of how management treats its employees.
In my previous job, I was in government service, so YMMV. I do think the principle carries over... If your boss puts improper pressure on you once, he or she will do so again. Best to get out before it escalates, while you can get a recommendation and while you are still employed.
I understand your predicament. I was hired as a lead developer at a company where "development" was unknown (although they did not know that they did not know what development was) -- my fault for not being more diligent in my pre-job interview.
My objective in taking a job (I had owned my own company for five years) was to slow down, enjoy activities outside work, and to focus on new technologies. Within three months, I was CIO. How can this happen?
1) There is a person at the company that desperately wants to be the manager of the "programmers." Unfortunately, he has no business skills, poor communications (his writing is atrocious), and poor technical skills (although he does not know it). It was a choice between him or me for the position. None of the developers wanted the other person as a "boss." Therefore, I reluctantly stepped in.
2) The company was failing to deliver on projects. As arrogant as it sounds, two people at the company had the skills to turn-around the company. One, a very experienced developer and Unix guru, simply did not want the job and left the company. If I wanted to keep the company open, I was the alternate. The company needed someone who could install the methods needed to develop web applications, and I was the only one remaining with those skills (out of almost 20 developers -- kinda' scary).
In each case I made the following mistakes:
1) I was always an alternate. I did not seek or accept the promotion willingly.
2) I strayed from my original objective by allowing group commitment and company allegiance (actually feeling sorry for the owners) to cloud my judgement. It is not my company, and I need to focus on that fact.
3) I did not want to work for an idiot as my boss (this seems common in the industry so I will accept working-for-an-idiot as a possibility).
3) I needed to stand firm.
In summary, I am miserable. The management position is all that I do. Bickering, moronic project managers, sales staff with little or no technical knowledge (they know the buzz words, however), endless paperwork, endless meetings, sign-off-syndrome (where no one wants to take responsibility for an action so they pass the action up the chain to get sign-off to CYA), ever expanding and changing duties (do this; no do that; why wasn't this done), and a dwindling development staff face me every day.
My advice, do what you like and stick with it. The fear of being fired is real. It keeps me awake a lot. But is firing really the end of the world when I did not want the job in the first place? And if my bosses do not respect MY wishes, do I really want to work for them? Not having a job is scary but is this fear really worth trudjing to a job every day that you absolutely hate? When you could have taken a chance and obviated the problem?
There should be a compromise in your situation between you and the management. It will probably depend on how you present your side. Stay factual and level headed. Refrain from emotional statements. Spell out the plan: "Mr. Boss, I will assist you with the transition as an interim manager including searching for a new manager." Agree on an effective date for the interim manager transition -- the transition period is planned for three months. Have the boss announce the arrangement. This gives you leverage in the event that the boss does not live up to his end of the commitment. Be firm but not demanding. Never say, "I'll give you three months, or I am outta here." Remember, finding that new manager will be tough in this market. From what you describe, you have a recognized talent, maturity, and managerial capabilities. Use these skills to help you see both sides and tread that happy middle. In the absolute worst case, you find another job. I doubt you will get to the worst case. But the worst can happen, and you need to be prepared for it -- but don't make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Even though it may not seem like it, you are in the driver's seat. You can either give up the seat and go where the management steers you, or you can start driving. As hypocritical as it is for me to say it (considering I gave up the seat), I would vote for driving.
Just some thoughts.
What you need is to insist on an administrative assistant who works directly for you. Somebody to handle the detail work. They need to be detail-oriented, have good organizational and social skills, but need not have a heavy technical background. Somebody who can take care of organizing the physical delivery of new equipment, handle non-technical dealings with vendors, take customer complaints and log them in, deal with minor office crises, and such.
The military uses sergeants in this way.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Before anybody asks, the Peter Principal pretty much states than in any heirarchical organization, people tend to rise to their first level of incompetence; that is to say, they will continue to be promoted until they reach a level that they cannot handle, and instead of then being taken down one notch, to where they'd probably be happy and productive, they're left there, where they're lost and confused, yet have power.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
After I got my first year end review and raise I submitted my resume on the internet requesting 30% more than my new salary. They saw my resume on the internet and tried to confront me about it. I commented 'Hey you just adjusted my salary so that it is fair. No one would pay me 30% more than I am worth.' They asked to be kept informed. I receved an offer and they countered. Since then the raises have been big enough that no one shows interest when I request 30% more than my company is giving me. Maybe next year I will try 20%. Mark
Well, this post is now ancient, but I thought I had to respond to this well thought out response.
While it is well thought out, and quite correct, it misses the key point about the original author's dilemma: it is not the company's job to look out for employees' long term interests. It can't be; there's no way the company could do a decent job of it.
In a small company (6-8 people in IT, the original poster said), there's not a lot of room for exciting new challenges. How often do companies of that size implement new technologies?
All I was saying was that, given the parameters of the situation, the company's response was 1) predictable, and 2) completely within reason.
It's an unfortunate situation, but try to see it from the company's perspective. They're small. They have a bright guy who they think could do the job. He doesn't want to move his career in that direction. He's (probably) fairly easy to replace with someone who might have more ambition to further his/her career (and, by proxy, the company's interests). What would you do?
I'm certainly familiar with the Peter Principle. I partly subscribe to it (not entirely, because I think it assumes people lack the free will that our original poster exhibited, and that companies are soulless machinations).
If our poster wants to go become Linus or Dennis, more power to him. He's in the wrong job for that, though. Apparently his bosses realize that, even if he doesn't.
Cheers
-b
If I wanted a sig I would have filled in that stupid box.
And instead, if he has any brains about this situation, he would have his resume out yesterday, and they'll end up having to hire two people instead. Ah, the short-sightedness of manglement.
I'm tempted to say that he should consult with a laywer immediately and see if there are any, ah, "legal remedies" should manglement be stupid enough to fire him after all. Then call their bluff and sit.
But it gets better. After they fire him, he should be ready to work as a consultant/independent contractor for them at three times your current pay. Because when you're fired, the company does not get the benefit of "two weeks notice" so you can leave things in order.
Oh, and unless there's just cause, in .us he gets to collect unemployment, and (IIRC) the company has to pay more into the state unemployment funds. I don't think anybody would consider this "just cause".
Any company clueless enough to pull that kind of crap is not the kind of company I would want to stay at.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
If you get to the point where you have interviewed at other companies, DO NOT accept a counteroffer or other peace offerings! You are obviously dealing with morons (which of course is rather common). I just got out of a situation where they don't bother to try to keep anyone happy until they decide to leave... It just doesn't work that way. You've got to keep your employees content all the time, not just when they decide to leave. Best of luck with the job search! (I pretty much expect your management to botch the situation.)
-bluebomber
The Daily Build
They're like most people, trying to find an easy solution, by promoting the nearest potentially qualified person, but since you don't want the job, they've still got a problem. Don't let them make it your problem.
And with supervisors like that, it's only a matter of time before something else screwy comes along. I'd start looking for something else if I were you...
It's also not uncommon for people who have threatened to leave and been extended counteroffers to be the first ones laid off, fired, or passed over for promotion©
"The words of the prophets are written on the Slashdot walls."
Lawyers, threat of retribution and ultimatims are all counterproductive for you and your employer.
Admittedly, this is a highly cynical point-of-view. Most likely they think they are doing you a favor as it increases your worth in the company. I'm sure honest face to face meeting with the person you would be reporting to explaining your feelings regarding this promotion (i.e. going from a happy worker to a grumpy manager) they would probably reconsider. Also consider the fact they may not want to bring in someone above you out of fear you may react badly reporting to someone who knows less about the operation than you do. That would essentially be paying someone a significant salary who can't get the job done because of malice from below. Again, the answer is communication with upper management.
This is not the way to build a lasting empire.
Hmm as senior techie (i.e. highest non-management) I have reached my peak. I am doing what I want to do!
I do not want management - I am first and foremost a programmer I do not want to stop programming just because some management lunatic reckons I lack ambition. Actually true I achieved my ambitions years ago - I work for enjoyment and money to live no other reason.
Management = increased bullshit, meetings, dumb projects/ideas that have to be shot down (which ironically I can do more effectively from my current position) and no time for the stuff I enjoy. Fortunately for me my senior management had the brains (and more importantly the experience) to know that I was more valuable where I was. Unfortunately they hired some jerk who talked bullshit and had an impressive resume but ruined our first conversation by asking whether jpeg were 8bit... This from a guy who supposedly worked at IBM and for Prodigy for years... I walked...
By refusing the promotion, you're basically saying that you don't want to accept managerial responsibility, and want to continue on grunt work.
To a company, grunt work is easier to find than managerial talent. Managerial talent is what makes money, what makes the company work. By refusing the promotion, it looks to the company like you'll forever be a gruntworker--a dead end investment if you will. What in 5 years would make you worth more to the company? nothing. in fact, you'll probably be worth signifigantly less due to loss of knowledge and skill compared to the "young" crop of that time.
As a manager, you might have been good, you might have continually been promoted, and have been a great aid to making the company work--which would have been worthwhile, thus the promotion. As is, like I said, little chance of you personally increasing the companies value.
my condolences on your job if you do get fired, this situation is not right, though I do think I see where the company is coming from
Scott
Without technical expertise there would be no technical company. Managerial expertise, on the other hand, may or may not be necessary to keep things running smoothly.
For example, in many professional offices (doctors, lawyers, engineering consulting), there is no separate management. And a 6-8 person office with technical experts may well operate more like a professional office than a big, old-style hierarhical company. And it will fail if its technical talent isn't top notch.
ETHICAL employers balance the need of the company against the welfare of the employees. While it is true that employers have an ethical obligation to offer career advancement to all employees, this should never be proffered under duress. Doing so only embitters and dissillusions good people, because of the selfish nature of the act.
In situations that I have seen this occur, the primary motivating factor was one or more senior managers or VPs that were more interested in the advancement of their PERSONAL careers or wealth than the general welfare of the company or it's employees.
Sadly, there are only two solutions to your predicament:
1) Identify and sit down personally with culprits and explain to them WHY what they are doing is unethical, then repeat your offer to help select and train a new manager.
2) Vote with your feet.
Don't hold out much hope that number one will work, because the individuals involved would be forced to admit their own fallability and that's not easy for most individuals to do. If they are intelligent and ethical individuals, they will quickly come to see the error of their plan. But then again, why would they have come up with such a plan in the first place?
Hope this helps!
"A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
"A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
GeneralEmergency
Why not take the promotion and then demote yourself back to your old position?
Seen in this light, the case for promotion -- even enforced promotion -- seems to me to hold water. The technician who is unwilling to move up to a management decision might be seen to be indicating that he or she is unwilling to make sacrifices or compromises for the good of the company. Obviously, there might be legitimate reasons for not wanting to make the move -- a lack of confidence in one's people skills, inexperience in managing projects, and so forth -- but the original question provided rather more selfish motives -- satisfaction with the current level of responsibility, etc. That's all very well, but it's important to undertand that the primary purpose of a company is not purely keeping its employees happy, and damning the consequences. I think it's quite legitimate for a company to conclude that a lack of desire from an individual to help the company by taking on a more senior role is incongruous with the aims and concerns of the company in question.
Companies do succeed or fail, in a very real way, on the strength of their workforce, on the "fit". But it's important to understand that maintaining the ideal workforce is not merely a case of making sure everyone's happy, but rather of making sure that the right people are doing the right jobs, and that those people are dedicated employees with a real desire for the success of the company. Even now, with the growing disillusionment with the "new economy", there's the feeling amongst many techies that the "right thing" to do is to jump from job to job, going for whatever benefits are available and kicking up a fuss whenever things get a little awkard -- the success of the company is seldom considered. I personally think this is a dangerous attitude. Better, surely, to work for a company in which you have a real belief, and for which you'll work nail-and-tooth, even if that means a change from what you've been doing. Oh, and I do think it's naive to think of management's role as a superfluous one: while all the meetings, documents and other stuff that come as a part of management can doubtless be something of a pain, they're also often a very necessary evil. Besides, with responsibility comes opportunity to change the way things work -- so grab the bull by the horns, and do something to make the company you work for a better place with better product. You might even enjoy it... and it'll look great on the resume..
In my company, the job of IT manager falls to a nongeek With Clue person whose job is to (a) keep IT staff from drive-by taskings. That is, make sure the longterm goals don't suffer from day-to-day five minute help projects; (b) to act as the Guido bodyguard (interpreter/buffer zone) between IT and management , and (c) keep aware of what we're all working on, making sure it contributes to The Big Picture.
Rather than bring in a new Alpha, you might want to suggest they bring in someone who can perform the management functions and leave the tech to you.
--Any sufficiently reliable magic is indistinguishable from technology.
My problem with this response is that it denies the possibility that competent people could be interested in expanding their skill sets and meeting new challenges, but not interested in management.
Just because we're not in a field where we customarily work in isolation doesn't mean that we all have a desire to manage others in our field after we reach a certain level of development. Why do you feel a lack of interest in a management career path equates to a lack of interest in all professional development?
Furthermore, you're probably aware of the "Peter Principle"--essentially the argument that the typical career track moves people ahead until they're in a position that they're not quite competent in, and strands them there. In practice, this usually manifests itself as moving people who are brilliant workers out of their field and into positions where they are managing the workers in their field.
Can you say for sure that Don Knuth, Linus Torvalds or Dennis Ritchie would be great managers? I certainly can't. And I don't think that that "lack" would be a true weakness on their part. If someone is interested in more of a development and research role, that's what they should be looking for. Perhaps their "track" should lead them not to group management as such, but to development director, strategic planner or senior researcher. But moving into a role they're not comfortable with doesn't benefit either them or the company, does it?
In this particular case, accepting the position might not be a bad thing politically--but getting out of it as quickly as possible would be the next logical goal, whether it was a move within that company or out.
Be the guy who hires the second in command. Then... this is where things get tricky. After the 2nd in command is hired: switch positions with him. You get your old job back - and you just hired your new manager so you have the least chance to complain about your new manager - you hired 'em.
Good luck.
The manager tried to give the programmer a bonus, but the programmer refused it, saying, "I wrote the program because I though it was an interesting concept, and thus I expect no reward."
The manager, upon hearing this, remarked, "This programmer, though he holds a position of small esteem, understands well the proper duty of an employee. Lets promote him to the exalted position of management consultant!"
But when told this, the programmer once more refused, saying, "I exist so that I can program. If I were promoted, I would do nothing but waste everyone's time. Can I go now? I have a program that I'm working one."
--- Hot Shot City is particularly good.
Probably not as true for a large company. From what I've seen, its just the reverse. Management is everywhere. But it takes forever to find a competent DBA or SA.
By refusing the promotion, it looks to the company like you'll forever be a gruntworker--a dead end investment if you will. What in 5 years would make you worth more to the company? nothing. in fact, you'll probably be worth signifigantly less due to loss of knowledge and skill compared to the "young" crop of that time.
I'll dispute the logic here you use to justify your argument. As long as I keep my job skills up, there is no reason to even consider management until I get into my 40's. Technical specialization really helps here. Does any company running Oracle think they need to get rid of their DBAs five years down the road?
Here are two reasons your employer likely holds - one valid, one not.
Valid: If they hire replacements to work beneath you, with you taking the promotion, they can hire cheap labor. If they need to hire someone qualified to work above you, they need to pay your wage or better up front.
Not Valid: If you don't want to take the promotion, they see you as less than 100% dedicated to your work. A disinterest in becoming more involved with the company's core functioning is seen as an gross manifestation of that lack of dedication and likely a slap in the face to those above you who have worked hard to get there.
If you're lucky, you may be able to work past the second by laying down exactly what you can accomplish in your current capacity that you cannot accomplish in the new position. Making an effort to express your position as concisely and absolutely as possible may save your job.
If the first is more the issue, you may be screwed. If they're trying to turn you from an expensive worker into an inexpensive manager, that's going to be hard to fight.
Valid: If they hire replacements to work beneath you, with you taking the promotion, they can hire cheap labor. If they need to hire someone qualified to work above you, they need to pay your wage or better up front.
There are LOTS of other valid reasons:
* When NewGuy enters, you are his de facto superior. You are qualified to do the job; heck, you were doing it on a temporary basis. You have more experience within the company, making you likely better at the job than NewGuy. In short, you'd be a hard person to manage.
* And then there's the part about changing horses mid-stream. You can do the job as your boss did it. NewGuy cannot, but he'd be managing a guy who could. In fact, you'd work well without a manager, but how many of your co-workers would? You may have to re-learn how to do your job. It'd be cheaper and easier to just hire someone else.
* Imagine the execs explaining to potential NewGuys that you hold the job but don't want it. Either (a) the job looks crappy or (b) you are painted as inept. Either way, the solution is simple; sionara to you.
* The position you currently fill is easily replacable, provided that your replacement is hired long-term. If you take a temporary promotion, they still need someone to do the job you were doing. It'd be easier to hire someone to do that on a permanent basis. It isn't that they want you gone, but that they have no choice but to hire your replacement.
I am certain there are plenty of valid reasons.
1. Hire from outside the department. No matter how good they guy is he'll take time learning the ropes and getting to know the employees. And until that guy gets up to speed, he'll be useless.
2. Promote from within the department. The new manager will already know the technical ropes and the learning curve on the mgmt ropes wouldn't take as long as with a new guy. Then you hire a low level new guy and everybody moves up a notch.
#2 certainly seems the better option for the business as long as the person tapped is willing to do it.
...when I was hired in to my company, there was no manager for our small group. We're weird ducks anyway--a commercial products group based inside a NASA/DoD contractor, and no one wanted to do anything with us. Corporate tried to make my boss--a damned good project engineer--into the manager. I like the guy a lot, but he'll tell you that he's no manager-type. It does take a certain type of person to manage other people, and that's not always the #2 guy.
What happened? My boss held the job strictly on a temporary basis, we got a guy hired into the job, and things went back to A-OK. The "new guy" kept the heat off of the engineers and also brought some new insights in.
So, there's a lesson in this: Tell the PHB's to bring in someone new to the group. A manager doesn't have to know all about your group's work. A manager does have to communicate well with those horizontal and vertical to them. So explain how you're not qualified to take the job but very qualified to stay where you are. Good luck!
--
-- Geof F. Morris
(1)Since he does his job well, he always gets his raise at his annual (or more frequent) review.
(2) Since he's been there a long time, he's gotten many raises.
(3) Therefore, he is now waaaay overpaid compared to anyone else in his department, since the other workers are new, or left after a 2-3 years for greener pastures, while he has been there 6, 10, or more years.
But firing him for doing his job would be too evil. Cutting his pay for doing his job is even more evil. So what is an "honourable" way to get rid of him?
Promote him into incompetance! Keep promoting him and adding responsibilities until he can't handle it and becomes incompetent in his new duties. Then you can safely fire him for not being able to do his job. Hey! It'll be *his* fault, right? Wow, aren't we the clever Mgmt folk!
However, if he refuses promotions, though, he's obviously on to Our Plan, and will be fired for outthinking Mgmt and making us look dumb and therefore creating a "hostile" work environment.
I've been in this exact situation four times. Each time I told them I just wanted to be the best techie/programmer/analyst/engineer possible and that although I possessed management skills, I'd done it before and would not do it again.
At three of the companies it was a bluff; they didn't want to lose me and all stayed fine.
At the fourth, they DID fire me. I had a job within a month that paid nearly twice as much and had better working conditions. I later found out (after the company folded six months later) the real reason they dumped me: they were planning some manifestly illegal activities and wanted me on the "inside" rather than in a position where I might ask difficult questions. Their firing me had NO adverse effect on my job hunt. One place wondered aloud why I'd stayed there so long. Evidently the company had gotten a reputation as being run by jerks and idiots. Interviewees were suspect if they'd stayed there more than a year or two, so getting dumped was actually in my favor.
I have never regretted turning down positions I didn't want, and I've been pushed toward them many more times than four. It's just those four that closely match your situation. In the case of the other three companies, I found that they respected me MORE after my refusals. Two of them gave me larger raises than usual immediately, all seemed to place more trust in my judgement afterwards.
Perhaps I'm a bit paranoid but in over ten years of working in the IT/technology industry I've never approached my supervisor or any other member of upper management responsible for signing my paycheck with an "or else I'll quit" threat.
;-)
If I feel my compensation and/or benefits are not what they should be I approach my current supervisor and in a reasonable but assertive fashion discuss what changes I think need to be made. At no point in the discussion do I imply that these changes had better get made or I'm gone.
After that I let my supervisor run with it for approximately two weeks at which point I touch base with them again.
Based on this second meeting I either get a sense that things have a chance of going my way or conversely I quietly begin my search for the next position.
Since a job search can take a month or two (to find the right position) you may end up being pleasantly surprised by being called into your supervisor's office to learn that you got what you asked for and that it just took a bit for the corporate wheels to turn.
If this doesn't happen then no big deal as you have begun you job search in earnest and are probably close to securing a new position.
In fact if you're smart you're are preparing yourself to leave your current position by:
* Quietly migrating all personal possessions
at work back home.
* Making copies of useful work/documents you
have created while on the current job.
* Stealing office supplies/equipment...
All this is done quietly a bit at a time over several weeks prior to leaving.
Then finally, when you land your shiny new job, you can go into your supervisor's office, submit your letter of resignation and be prepared for that to be your last minute of employment at that company and be comfortable with the knowledge there is nothing left undone, except to walk out the door.
This approach has worked for me in both management and hands on technical positions.
I would also advise anyone to resist the temptation of "short-timeritious". Do your job well right up to the end of your employment at a given company. Leave everyone with a good impression because its a strangely small world in this industry.
Don't burn bridges or remove someone as a possible reference if you can help it.
There are 100's of thousands of good IT jobs open out there right now.
In the worst case you can go find a new job in a short period of time. They are only shooting themselves in the foot if they fire you because not only can you likely sue them, they will then be losing TWO people at the top of their IT department instead of just one. They will then incur two times the costs to hire replacements, they will incur more 'downtime' with the new IT manager because he won't have you to learn the shop from and if they have to replace you as well, that is another person who has to come in and learn the shop and your software. They really don't want to have two new people to bring up to speed at once, because that will severely impact the work of at least one or two others. So in all reality, for a while they will be more than two people short staffed.
That being said... One thing you can do is offer to do the job on an interim basis and help them find the new IT manager in the mean time. That may not be the most fun thing in the world, but it makes it look like you are taking an active role in dealing with the situation and as a bonus, it gives you some control to hopefully get someone in who you can get along with. Basically, they make take 'no' more easily if they are off the hook from having to find a replacement manager, especially if you can do it without them having to pay big headhunter's fees. Start tapping your contact pool to see if you can find someone who might be qualified.
One of their possible motives for trying to force promote you is that they may think that they can offer you less of a salary increase than what they'd have to pay a new hire as manager. You shouldn't let them do that. If you get forced into taking the promotion, you should demand more than what the previous manager was getting. Then even if you hate it and end up quitting, you will at least have gotten some bucks out of the deal, a little resume padding and a bump in your salary history that will hopefully land you a better job and more pay later.
Here's what you say: "If I'm promoted to IT manager, I'll quit. Now you've lost me either way. If that was your intention, then this discussion is over--I have to go look for a new job, which I will likely find within 30 days. If losing me was NOT your intention, let's begin a reasonable discussion of our differences."
If a reasonable discussion does not begin immediately, start sending out your resume. When you get back a stack of interview requests, go back to Management and show them the physical evidence of the interest in your talents. Go to the interviews. When you get an offer, show it to Management. If they still do nothing, they really want you gone. More likely, though, at some point before you get an offer elsewhere they will get nervous about losing you entirely and start to be reasonable.
--
MailOne
Non-meta-modded "Overrated" mods are killing Slashdot
(Hey Ryan! Here's your proof!)