How To Work With People Who Won't Do Their Job

How aggravating is it when you are trying to get your work done but your work relies on other people who just don't do their job? This infuriating phenomenon seems more common than ever, and we're not sure who to blame. It's quite possible that technology is the culprit. People are so over-stimulated by millions of emails and texts and chats and distracted by flashing banner ads and the urge to update their Facebook status every five seconds that they get super confused and forget what they're supposed to be doing in the first place - their job. Well, we asked around and combined the gems of wisdom we heard from our friends and colleagues with our own proven strategies. We hope this saves you time and a little bit of frustration.

If you suspect that technology is indeed the problem, then we suggest making technology your friend by using it against your lazy enemy. If the person in question doesn't respond to your emails, then text them. If they don't respond to your texts, find them on gchat and chat them. If that doesn't work, blackberry message them. You get the idea. Try each form of communication once a day every day until you get a response. We're pretty sure they'll hate being attacked on all fronts so much that they'll actually log off of gchat, power down their blackberry, and start doing their freaking job.

Another way to use technology against someone is to employ the powerful CC. If you work at a corporation and need a co-worker's help to get your job done, CC their boss on every request you make. It may piss them off and make them feel tattled on, but having their boss aware of every job they are supposed to do for you is definitely a good thing.

If you don't think that technology is your problem after all, and instead you're just stuck with a lazy person who doesn't give a crap about helping you, it might be a little bit tougher to get them in shape. In this case, we don't suggest using technology at all. Instead, walk on over to their office and tell them in person how much you appreciate their help. Seeing you as a human being in need as opposed to an email address on a screen might help motivate them. Be careful, though. Kathleen, who works at a University's Alumni Office, says, "It's important to try not to come across as arrogant or condescending - this tends to slow the process down and create more resistance on the other end (as if you're not getting enough already)."

Another piece of advice we received might not make many of you happy. An anonymous publicist at a major movie studio said, "I just freaking do their job for them--and let it be known. And at the end of the day I hope and pray that my work will be recognized and I will be the one to get the raises and promotions." While you may not be looking for another set of responsibilities, it's true that sometimes the extra work does pay off. So if you're angling for a promotion, this may be the way to go.

Of course, one common suggestion from everyone we talked to was to fix the problem, not the solution. A retired CEO of a postal company simply said, "Fire them!" Kathleen also said, "If you're the boss, fire him or her immediately!" However, Kathleen also has some good advice for those of you who aren't in the position to hire and fire. "Bribery," she says, "never hurts, either."

Comments

[mamacat]

One cannot work "with" someone who does not work. One can work around them, or in spite of them, or without them, but not with them.

Too often in the corporate world, those who do the least amount of work spend the most amount of time kissing up to the bosses. Too often, those who do not and/or cannot work end up getting the promotions, making the situation temporarily better for those at the top, but making the organisation weaker in the long run.

I have had people in management admit to me that they would choose those who did the least work for promotions to supervisory positions, on the theory that such people often make the best supervisors. That is certainly not my opinion on how to make a lean, mean, fighting machine, but then its not my corporation to run. I even read a manual, when I was in the armed services, discussing the advantages of promoting someone who does not work over someone who does work. The theory was that this way you do not lose a worker, and the slouch might make a good supervisor.

I have said this before, but, am I the only one who thinks this is a recipe for disaster?

[PlanetK27]

QUESTION FOR DEBATE: Can ONE person only truly do the work of ONE person?

In the phrase, "I do the work of two people", does it follow that one person can only do the work of one person? If one person does a lot of work, isn't it really just the potential maximum work that ONE person can accomplish? And who works to the maximum capacity of a human being each and every day? We have seen through forced labor, slave labor, that in relatively short amounts of time massive things can be built or accomplished. Managers often get "more work" out of an employee by motivation. Not much compares to a positively motivated employee or a self-motivated employee, to do the work of THREE (?).

Is there some practical unit of measurement of just what is an amount of work ? Some jobs are easier to note productivity, others not so easy. If I choose to be much smarter, than a fellow worker, and use my intelligence to save myself and the company much time and effort, does that allow for me to take my day just that much easier or does a greater workload just naturally fill the void. To me it seems like the latter. There are ordinary horses and there are "workhorses". Some people just look the part and know how to make something like (though truly valuable) filling the copy machine with a ream of paper look like curing a disease.

RSVP

[preatorius]

Maybe the company will fire the other person, and consolidate all the work, and give it to you!
Seen it!

[NotaBeliever]

It's kind of been my experience that the slacker finds a better job somewhere else, and then the slacker's work was given to me ... because I was already doing it anyway. Perfect corporate logic. I don't know who did my job after I left, and I always left ... and at the time ... there were always other jobs available. Good old days. Pre-GWBush. Now I work for myself. It's better.

[robco]

I'd say the worst advice in the article was doing the other person's job for them and praying that will be rewarded, it won't. If anything, your manager will do nothing at all because the work is getting done. S/he needs to feel the pain before they take action. Kinda like the double-edged sword of being irreplaceable. If you're really irreplaceable you may not be fired, but you'll never be able to take a vacation and you'll never be promoted. Much depends on your industry or workplace but it's true that actual performance matters little. Hell, we elected Dubya cuz folks want to have a beer with him. Well, that's how it works in the workplace as well. It's about who, not what you know.

As for younger workers, as one, I'll tell you that I saw the previous go-getter Baby Boomer generation work themselves to death. Long days, weekends, whatever it took, give 110% and all that nonsense. Know what it got them? Divorced or in strained marriages, kids who barely know them, stressed out, physically ill because of work. And now they're all getting screwed out of their pensions and savings thanks to the lack of regulation in the finance industry. No thank you. I'll work, I'll do my job - to a point. But I will have work/life balance and I'm not going to wait until I'm in my sixties to enjoy life and take some time off once in a while.

[MuchMadness]

Ideally good workers would be able to easily find new employment at better companies, and the companies with bad management would perish because they would be left with only slackers and incompetents. But the American employer-based health insurance system provides a strong incentive for workers, especially middle aged and older workers, to put up with a lot of malarkey rather than change jobs. If a person has a pre-existing condition, he or she might not be able to get health insurance coverage at a new job, or there might be a costly waiting period before certain services are covered.

[mamacat]

Good point.
I think we should have, not only universal or transportable healthcare, but transportable retirement, as well.

[JBS]

Might take a look at the other side of the coin - over worked and under paid. Why SHOULD I bust my butt for the company? What's in it for me? Self esteem from a job well done? It sure ain't reflected in my paycheck.

And Kroger don't accept "self esteem" to pay for the groceries.

[Destin]

I think the article is a bit slanted, always ragging on employees, rather than managerial positions, even CEO's. Sure, there are workers everywhere who slack off alot, don't always pull their weight, underperforming, whatever. But I am willing to stake my retirement on this fact, the % of managerial types doing that, compared to entry level workers doing that, is probably 200% or higher. I should know, I spent an entire life, in the military, private sector and civilian working for the DoD. I've seen the same crap management everywhere I've worked. And if there's 1 surefire way to ensure you have lots of underperforming, uninspired, "going through the motions" workers, it is to have bosses that are crap. Most bosses don't even know how to do their job, lol, let alone be effective managers of anything. And how in the hell can they honestly say they know what they are doing, and what's best for the workers, if they've never done the job?? It's pure insanity.

Most of my management preferred to stay in their plush air conditioned offices, while the workers were out in the heat. The only time you'd see them, if the team was underperforming and they'd come out to crack the whip, lol. Threaten the overworked workforce with more work. Brilliant idea, while we're already doing managements 24 layers of managerial jobs for them, why don't they just sign us over their paychecks as well??

[AnnaCaroline]

Your problem isn't managers. It's bureaucracy.

As a non-unionized manager of unionized staff I work 60-70 hours a week and make just $2000 less than my employees. They work 40. Period. Otherwise, we're looking at double time.

I have my own office while they share a common work room. Both are air-conditioned. Mines littered with stacks of papers and files that need to be worked on. They've got plants and knick-knacks.

My days are spent attmepting to balance my own projects and deadlines against the fact that I spend almost half my time correcting their mistakes...the ones they make because they don't know how to manage time or pay attention to detail or ask questions...all those little things that got me my oh-so-cushy promotion.

I've milked union contracts before. I know how to work them...but it doesn't matter. Drones are conditioned to do nothing more than they have to in order to get by. Oh, but they all want pats on the back...as if $20 an hour to do a minimum wage job wasn't enough.

I'm sorry, but I've had WAY MORE crappy employees than crappy managers.

Now excuse me, but I've got to go to my part-time job...the one where I'm not a manager...the one I need to keep up with today's economy...and suffer the dirty looks of all my other co-workers for offering to put in a little extra effort.

[nastyvirus]

The fact that you're still there is a testament to your complacency. Get off your lazy, whining behind and draft that fabulous resume, the one that will lift you out of that job and into the one you think you deserve. Either that or join the military. They're always looking for officer material to tell others how and when to die.

As for those crappy employees, please remember that while YOU can improve your bottom line, most of them cannot. Twenty dollars an hour, in the face of mounting bills and debt, is not enough in today's world. That's it for them, the end of the line in terms of pay scale, advancement, or even learning.

But prospects look better for you, you're a manager. You could work anywhere, that is if your good at it.

[cinemaven]

Speaking as someone who has negotiated contracts on both sides of the table, I'd have to say that the problem in the scenario you've outlined is you.

It's your job to ensure that the employees are doing their jobs and it's also your job to keep meticulous records when employees are not doing their jobs. YOU are the front line of the bureaucracy!!

Oh, and it's very possible that the fact that you see your co-workers as drones is a huge part of the problem. If you were in my employ, that's the first thing I would have you work on :)

[cinemaven]

The strategies in this post are a bit puzzling to me. If a co-worker wasn't pulling their weight, I'd speak to them face to face because if I had time to find them on gchat, blackberry and e-mail, I'd be just as guilty as they were of not doing their job. I never use e-mail for a problem like this because e-mail can be misconstrued... or worse, ignored.

When I worked in an office environment and this happened, I would go to the person and ask nicely what the hold up was... explain my own timelines and, once we'd talked about it, I would reinforce the message with a confirmation mail. If the work didn't come in on time, I just got their supervisor involved. After a few times, I noticed that although everyone else was complaining about the couple of people who acted that way, I didn't ever have that problem from them.

The problem is often that there's a lack of follow through on issues like this. Person A complains to co-workers but seldom to the supervisors involved and it's their job to deal with a problem like this one...

[mdhatter]

It really is amazing just how misconstrued an e-mail can be.

Make someone defensive and their ability to comprehend your intentions decreases, drastically.

[dadw5boys]

After I saw an employee not doing their job several times I would start taking responsible away from them. Each week that went by and they were not working they lost part of thier job to someone else. It onlt take 3 weeks on average to have all the work moved to someone else then firing the unproductive one is easy bercause I will hace installed a camera detailing their lack of work all that time and use it not to pay unemployment. It is easy to fight paying when you can show they have already quit the job but just have not stopped comming to clock in.

[mdhatter]

Dad, your first idea is brilliant. Your second one, well, you can be more clever than that. Make them send you an e-mail at the end of the day summarizing what they worked on. If you start installing camera's, even your best workers will rebel.

[smokeystover39]

dadw5boys: Love your idea except there are a few flaws: Moving the work to someone else can easily be characterized as discrimination (which has NOTHING to do with race or gender) IF you fail to document the employee inability to do the work AND IF you fail to place them on notice through a witnessed meeting. "You can't seem to do ...... so I'm going to have to move it to Mr...... You are also not meeting expectations in the following other areas........." You give them a copy of the meeting minutes and have them sign off on a file copy. A Union shop has disciplinary steps - follow them! In a nonUnion shop - document in writing and have witnesses. In both cases ONLY documented and progressive discipline steps will save you from having to hire an attorney when the employee sues the bejezes out of your company.

CAMERAS? Forget them unless there is a security issue. Better check your state's law re work place cameras AND IF they are allowed ya better save every one of the tapes for the lawsuit - not from just the slacker, but a possible class action by all your employees.

As I said - great idea - just a few flaws.

[booker52]

I can tell you who is to blame and that is your supervisor. If they don't do their job and make these jokers do their job, then all bets are off. I have worked in a office that had slackers like this. Two to be sure. Our boss, nice lady, but no great pusher to get these slackers to to their jobs, so their work was always farmed out to the rest of the office. What joy! I can tell it wasn't. And these two cost the company big time by them not doing their work in a timely manner.

[HamletsMill]

Dinosaur corporate Americans are the worst business people on Earth and we as a nation are now going to get our asses kicked worldwide. But thank God I work with the greatest, most talented, hard working bunch of street smart people imaginable. There is no business school that teaches Sun Tzu at the street level. That comes from the school of hard knocks.

We all lost our jobs in a corporate takeover where all product development was moved to Boston and Dallas. We were initially staggered but slowly reformed on our own out in the street. Eventually got venture capital and are back in business after five years of incredible effort throwing on every down. We went from $0 to $55 million in revenues and the NYC Wall St. corporation that threw us into the street went under having to sell our book of business for $380 million to pay off debt they accrued like drunk'in sailors and is now being sued by the Attorney Generals of 18 states for insurance processing fraud. We are now getting their clients back hand over fist.

All because everyone pulled their weight with great skill. No room in our company for people who cannot convert third downs into first downs. The days of fat American business corporations and their clueless MBA managerial classes drifting through life are over. I am truly blessed. I would lay down my life for the people I work with. I absolutely love them.

[JLee]

That's quite a story. The new wave isn't just American politics, it's in American business as well. In the end it all comes down to people, creative and motivated individuals who identify their self-interest with the organization and will give it their all. Sounds like you've found that. Congratulations for your well-deserved success, and I seriously hope to see more like it in this troubled country.

[BluePatriotWoman]

Is it technology or is it generational? There are certainly younger people who are very responsible (and, importantly, much better at multi-tasking than older workers),but I see in younger workers a pervasive sense of entitlement that is utterly misplaced. If you bring a problem to their attention the response is often along the lines of "so?" (not my job) -- even if it IS their job. I used to blame this on the American education system, which emphasizes study teams and lets the lazy ones slide in on the work of responsible students. But after my recent travels abroad -- in first and third world countries, I think it's the alignment of the planets or a side effect of American movies because I found this attitude EVERYWHERE!

One important factor that has been overlooked in the post and the responses is the culture of the organization -- are there clearly stated work rules and a process for evaluation based on those rules? Many small organizations don't bother and this can breed these small anarchies. Another issue is that supervisors may be afraid to confront poor performing employees because they fear not being liked or, worse, being accused of harassment. It's as bad as those who are more interested in being friends with their young children than doing their jobs as parents.

[chumleypotts]

My son told me an interesting story - as a supervisor, he had a marginal employee on his crew who was constantly griping about how life is so unfair, how no one understands him, blah, blah, blah. one day my son gave him a specific task to do - the task was related to his daily duties anyway. When he had finished, he informed my son and said, "I did what you told me to do - what do I get for it?" My son replied, "You get to work here tomorrow, too". This was several years ago, and that employee was terminated for job abandonment eventually. You are right - companies can no longer afford to keep "dead wood" on the payroll today, and the sooner these slackers get bounced down the front steps, the better.

[Queenofthedamned]

The "harassment" part is bs. It's a pain in the rear, but if you as a manager think harassment is an issue, you just have to be proactive with your HR dept., keep copious written records, and have YOUR supervisor witness confrontations and approve of your attempts to improve performance. Poor employee performance is ultimately the responsibility of managment. Either you motivate the person to get with the program and continually improve, or you "manage" the person OUT. That's why you managers get the medium dollar. And, if a peer is keeping you from getting YOUR job done, you've got to, in writing, request the specifics of what you need, with deadlines. CC your boss. TELL your boss how you're going to proceed soon as you get the assignment. If you don't et your boss'es blessing, take that as a signal that you don't have 100% support & find yourself another opportunity.

[mdhatter]

The younger generation sees the difference between loyalty and fealty.

You want their best work? Then you best know the difference too.

[MysticInd]

Yes, it is generational and part of the Educational System.
But Multi-tasking is BS. the quickest way to get something done is to focus on it and only it.
When multi-tasking, something is not getting done and it's rude. I used to do it long ago and got sent to a time management class that showed me exactly what I was missing by doing too many things at once.
It boils down to "you are paid to do a job" or "if you don't like it or can't handle i you should leave!"
This applies to the managers as well.

But it's called politics, and the best brown noser wins. Unfortunately, it's rambit in every part of life and it...

[wm1066]

My boss used to give projects to me and my lazy coworker. So I talked my boss into delegating a project either to me or my coworker. I had total control over my own work and my coworker couldn't pawn off his work on me. And my boss got to see the differance in how much work we got done.

[KillgoreTrout43]

It's up to management to see that thier people do thier job. Not doing thier job? Say bye-bye. Any other attempt to get them to work, that they are taking money for, is a waste of time.

[MyGuyO]

This reminds me of the time when my boss hired another employee to help me with my enormous workload. (truly I was doing the work of two people.) Employee started out fine, but then there was trouble in her marriage. well that started everything to go haywire in the office. This person constantly was on the phone trying to work out her marriage problems, then after that she would take long, long cigarette breaks. Where was the help I needed! I finally confronted my boss as I couldn't stand this anymore and told this to my boss. His answer was, " Oh, have a heart, she is going through a tough time right now." This was not the answer I wanted. I just fumed all the more as I didn't get any support...just all the stress. Talk about fairness. Hrumph!