Asked to secretly obtain coworker's knowledge before he gets fired

Question

I was recently told by my manager that one of my coworkers (call him Steve) will be fired in a few weeks, as his last reviews were found unsatisfactory.

My manager also told me to "inquire and observe" more closely Steve's work and clients from now on, (he works on sales and marketing) so his knowledge is preserved in the company and so I can learn more about those things (as I will be assigned some of his tasks and clients after he leaves).

Now, I was also told to do this with "discretion", so he doesn't suspect anything unusual is happening. Also, it is of my knowledge that his firing will be immediate, so he won't be getting any previous notice whatsoever.

I can't help to feel that I should warn Steve somehow, as it seems unethical to fire him without any previous notice (thus affecting him greatly), not to mention asking me to "spy" on him and pretend nothing is going on.

Even though I feel like warning him, this seems to be a bad decision. I feel really uncomfortable with the idea of having to stalk on him so I can absorb any knowledge he has before leaving.

Are there any other options I might consider to prevent this knowledge situation from being handled that way? Could it be done in a more transparent way, something that would even help the knowledge transfer? I guess I could try convince my manager of this somehow.

How a colleague will be fired is not your business, however your manager should never have tell you that and ask to spy your coworker. Moreover if your team discover that you spy for the boss, they won't ever trust you again. You should push back with that arguments, or search for a new job. — Walfrat, Sep 01 '17 at 07:21
Don't worry too much about the "no notice" - they probably intend to give him money in lieu of notice, so he will be paid while going about his job hunt. If I asked you not to tell someone about my decision and then you did, you would be out the door before that person. — Kate Gregory, Sep 01 '17 at 10:53
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. — Jane S, Sep 02 '17 at 23:19
There are a lot of really bad answers below. You can't help Steve. Don't destroy your career. After the event, helping him land on his feet is fine. — Tony Ennis, Sep 04 '17 at 22:02
@graycygnus, I've been put in a similar tricky situation. To be honest, there is not much you can do. If you warn your colleague, you will be fired you too or forced to resign or something similar.
However, you Sir, are in different position. You need to show you are team player by not caving to your line manager spying wish but telling him gently as Motosubatsu has suggested that "this won't get you what you want".

And when Steve will be gone, if it turns you were spying on him, he'll let your colleagues know that how you "rat" on him.

But one of other concerns no one mentioned — John Legas, Sep 05 '17 at 13:10
is you in the firm you currently working for. If your line manager is capable of exhibiting such poor behaviour, why won't you be the next to fall?
That question, you have to answer it for you.

Will you be the next fall guy?

As I said, I was in a similar situation as you are and the next thing I knew, I was the fall guy... — John Legas, Sep 05 '17 at 13:13
I've never heard of getting fired with notice or severance pay. Those things happen when someone is laid off or otherwise let go on good terms. What do you expect to happen to their work ethic and productivity if you tell someone they are getting fired next week? — JPhi1618, Sep 05 '17 at 13:56
"as it seems unethical to fire him without any previous notice." - You haven't ever worked in broadcasting, I presume? You NEVER give anyone who has access to critical information or resources notice. You pay them severance. In the case of salesmen, you make a severance package contingent on having no contact with the customer base, and you pay in installments, not all at once. You may not like it, personally, but it is hardly "unethical." It is common and accepted practice in sensitive roles. — Wesley Long, Sep 05 '17 at 15:19
@DLS3141 I have fired people and given them pay "in lieu of notice." It is typical and normal here. — Kate Gregory, Sep 05 '17 at 16:24
@KateGregory hmmm yes, I see you're in a civilized country. Here you just get a boot in the rear as you're frog-marched out the door. — DLS3141, Sep 05 '17 at 17:02
@DLS3141 Wthout being ironic, I hope to never work in your "country" (read jungle?). ;) — Andy K, Sep 06 '17 at 08:12
"his last reviews were found unsatisfactory" - presumably Steve is aware of this, so he's not completely in the dark? And if Steve isn't aware of it, how are you aware? — Fiora the Ferret, Nov 25 '18 at 10:34
Wow, that's even more crappy than I thought. It's one thing not to tell someone they're about to be fired, but not even telling them that they could/should improve their performance...? — Fiora the Ferret, Nov 25 '18 at 10:44

score 130 · Accepted Answer · answered Sep 01 '17 at 08:26

130

Damn, that's a really crappy situation for both you and "Steve"

As I think you've already concluded warning him is not a smart move, as ruthless as it sounds you need to look out for yourself. Sure him having some notice and being able to prepare would help him out a bit since he could get a jump on the job hunt but that's not really worth potentially putting your own standing at the company at risk. If this was someone you were a close friend with irrespective of the workplace then I'd think differently about it but otherwise it's basically taking on a shedload of risk for yourself for no real gain. Remember that the firing-without-notice may be unethical but it's not you being unethical it is the company so it's not your responsibility to fix it.

Being put into the position of having to covertly gather knowledge of his work and role isn't great and I know I'd feel uncomfortable too but it's what your employer is currently requiring of you and as potentially distasteful as it is it is not entirely uncommon. To be honest in your place I would look to pick up what bits and pieces of the knowledge you could within the bounds of your own comfort levels, for me this would be just paying attention to what he does and trying to get the knowledge more passively. You won't get anywhere near as much which will make taking on the departing Steve's duties harder for you but I know that would sit better with me. If your bosses are keen to push a more active situation of knowledge transfer then at point you can push back a bit and say something like:

I'm struggling to find a way to do that without it being obvious that something is going on. I know you don't want Steve to know but I think he'll know pretty quickly if I start explicitly shadowing him or asking about X/Y/Z. If you want me to do those things I think you'll need to have a talk with him first.

At that point they will need to decide what is more important to them - keeping it secret or extracting the most knowledge.

If they ask you to do them and lie about the reasons why then you can re-iterate that you aren't comfortable with doing that and that you feel it will be transparent and that if/when he works out he is going to be fired and they were hiding from them that they won't get anything out him and may even face him being actively resistant. That way you aren't saying "nah, don't want to" you're saying "this won't get you what you want" which is a subtle but important distinction that shows you are still on "Team Employer". To be honest if they can't see that then you probably want to start polishing the old CV since they probably aren't people you want to be working for and they may even do the same to you at some point so keeping your options prepared would be a wise move!

answered Sep 01 '17 at 08:26

motosubatsu

107,822
51
290
367

11

Excellent points, especially the part about pointing out to the boss that the secretive approach can be counterproductive. That is a solution that is both practical and ethical. – sleske Sep 01 '17 at 13:06
34

I agree, this is the best approach. Just wanted to point out that termination without notice in itself is not unethical. "Unethical" does not mean "unfair." The company is protecting itself from any potential damages the employee might cause in his last days, out of spite, if he knows he's being fired. Asking the OP to spy on said employee in advance is a shady move, but the idea of firing someone without notice is not. – Steve-O Sep 01 '17 at 13:36
6

@Steve-O I agree the ethics aren't exactly black and white - as with so many ethical questions context is everything. I didn't want to derail the answer with going off on a tangent hence my use of the phrase "may be unethical" – motosubatsu Sep 01 '17 at 13:46
@Steve-O I would be very surprised if a company ever allowed someone being fired to actually stay in the office. As someone else mentioned, they will likely continue to pay him for some notice period, he just won't come in and will have no access to anything. – IllusiveBrian Sep 01 '17 at 19:39
5

Preparing a firing in secrecy due to low performance indicates company's immature management. Normal way would be to put an employee on Performance Development Plan, i.e. "in next 3 months we expect you to meet these measurable KPI's: ..., ..., ..." so he clearly knows about expectations he has to meet to stay. Otherwise, atmosphere of insecurity is built: "Who of us will be the next? What performance is sufficient enough?" – miroxlav Sep 02 '17 at 11:08
10

The part about "the company is doing something unethical, not you" doesn't totally work in most cases. If you are aware of an action taken by a group or members of a group that you are in that is illegal, immoral, and/or unethical, and you do absolutely nothing about it, you're not completely free of blame or guilt. The least that anyone can do in such a situation is start looking for an exit, such as another job. Just two days before posting this comment I refused an unethical request my boss made, and he thanked me for pointing out it was unethical. Doing nothing is rarely the best option. – Todd Wilcox Sep 03 '17 at 01:26
15

what is wrong with you all. Just warn Steve and quit already. This company has no moral what-so-ever, don't be part of the evils of the world. – vidstige Sep 03 '17 at 06:26
1

Company´s aren´t unethical, people are. In this case Crays Boss. It´s crays decision if he wants to be part of it, try to fix it or work somewhere else. In any way - he is entirely his responsible for his own actions! – Daniel Sep 04 '17 at 07:25
5

@vidstige Good idea, since there's no such things in life as unemployment and financial obligations. – Dmitry Grigoryev Sep 04 '17 at 12:42
2

@DmitryGrigoryev there are always options. There are other jobs, etc. If people didn't put up with this shit, we would have a better world. How far would you go to keep your employment? Surely, even you have limits. Let's all raise that limit. – vidstige Sep 04 '17 at 13:01
5

@vidstige Some people really struggle to get a job. Telling to them that there are always options is like telling to obese people they should stop being obese. – Dmitry Grigoryev Sep 04 '17 at 13:13
1

@DmitryGrigoryev I understand everything is black and white to you, but realize we all have a moral responsibility. Personally I'd say better fired, poor and miserable than being an asshole just to follow orders. But each to their own, etc. – vidstige Sep 04 '17 at 13:20
7

@vidstige Getting fired over an issue such as the OP is having, while being poor, counts as being even a bigger asshole towards one's children in my book. – Dmitry Grigoryev Sep 04 '17 at 13:27
@IllusiveBrian Is this a crazy US thing again? Here in Europe people are given a month, sometimes two months, of advance warning (required by law) they will be terminated. They help the company secure their knowledge, finish some work, and then take whatever vacation days they have left to start searching for a new job. No need for this crazy secret immoral stuff. – Roy T. Sep 05 '17 at 07:38
1

It scares me that this answer contains this sentence: "Remember that the firing-without-notice may be unethical but it's not you being unethical it is the company so it's not your responsibility to fix it." If you follow this reasoning no one at any company has any accountability whatsoever and no-one will ever get in their way to try and fix it. Now I'm not saying you should just tell Steve everything, but you can tell your boss that you're uncomfortable doing this and won't do it unless Steve is informed. – Roy T. Sep 05 '17 at 07:40
@RoyT. Perhaps it depends on the industry, but I would be surprised if in Europe they let anyone with access to critical or sensitive systems/files/etc continue having access to those once that person knows they are going to be fired. No matter why someone is being fired, they may get vindictive. – IllusiveBrian Sep 05 '17 at 11:35
@IllusiveBrian Being vindictive in that way would lead to jail time or serious fines. I can imagine some top level military/diplomatic people having their access rights revoked. But at simple office jobs? I've never heard of such a thing. – Roy T. Sep 05 '17 at 11:48
@RoyT. Bank robbery also leads to serious jail time, and yet some people are bank robbers. Maybe that person wouldn't normally do anything wrong, but the stress of being fired can cause some people make bad decisions like trying to get back at their company, so companies just avoid the problem by revoking their access as soon as they are given notice. Keep in mind that this also means that the person being fired can use the time to find another job, rather than having to continue working at the company. – IllusiveBrian Sep 05 '17 at 13:58
2

@vidstige if you have a family to support, I'd say making sure they have a roof over their head and food in their mouths is the bigger "moral responsibility" than trying to do Steve a solid. In a perfect world you'd do that, quit, and some happy ethical company would go "OMG you did the Right Thing™, you're hired!" the next day. Sadly, we don't live in a perfect world, and making a martyr of yourself isn't going to keep the bills paid. – Doktor J Sep 05 '17 at 14:32
@DoktorJ don't kid yourself. I know what you are talking about. I used to see things this way as well. I'd say especially if you have a family, you have to straighten your back, do good in the world, and be a good example. Your family will respect you if you respect yourself. When you are being oppressed you feel like you have no other options, but go on, but there are other jobs, trust me. I have a kid self, and understand the need to provide. There is no need for idealistic extreme action, but just asking yourself "is this moral?" is a good start. You always have choice in life - Use it! – vidstige Sep 06 '17 at 09:11
Not other jobs that pay the bills, sadly. If you're the sole provider in a household, you need to have a job that pays the bills, and I know from personal job-seeking experience that those are not always easy to come by. – Doktor J Sep 06 '17 at 12:27
RoyT, if the company thinks you are a menace when you find out that you will be fired, the company can give you a payment in lieu of notice. Say you have two months notice, then they can fire you, throw you out of the building, and pay you for the last two months. Now that is a shock, but if you find a job in two weeks, you get paid twice for the next six weeks. (Old employer and new employer). So you are not worse off, and possibly better off, then with two months notice. – gnasher729 Dec 09 '21 at 19:42

score 93 · Answer 2 · answered Sep 01 '17 at 14:05

93

Another lesson I learned in life is that a company that will do that to a fellow employee will do that to you. Update your resume and be ready to move. This is an awful position to be in.

Don't warn him "officially" as this will only bite you hard later, but if a few things start happening that are beyond your control like meetings being scheduled without him being invited. Plans for outings with coworkers where he's not invited.... that's different, {nudge nudge, wink wink} or you may "accidentally" be less covert than you intend to be.

If you want to avoid such "accidents" then it's a good idea to just keep your head down and do a little reverse delegation and ask your management for specifics on how to be covert, how much of his knowledge they are comfortable with you obtaining, and let them make the call. What they are doing is dirty and while you have to play their game, you can also make sure they spell out the rules.

If you really want to help the man, make a few phone calls, find out who's hiring in the area, and when he gets the news, console him but mention that you were talking to some old friends, and coincidentally they mentioned that they were hiring. Don't give any indication that you knew anything, also don't do this unless he's a good worker and recommending him would not tarnish your own reputation.

You are in a tight spot, but try to make the best of it by doing whatever good you can do.

answered Sep 01 '17 at 14:05

Old_Lamplighter

159,693
108
436
585

I could "accidentally" leave my browser open to this question when he is nearby, but that is something I still have to ponder... Also agree on preparing in case this happens to me eventually – DarkCygnus Sep 01 '17 at 15:44
1

@GrayCygnus don't do that. Also, is he being fired or laid off? – Mindwin Remember Monica Sep 01 '17 at 16:34
It is not like he did something terrible (I think?) and he is being fired for that, it is more like management no longer seems him fit for his position. In my country those two words are basically the same, but you could say he is being laid off as it is not something bad. – DarkCygnus Sep 01 '17 at 16:39
10

While I agree that companies need to CYA and one tool is to immediately fire someone and another is to glean knowledge from an individual before leaving, this smacks of bad management in that they should already know what the individual is doing and how they are doing it. Especially in light of the fact that the employee has had some bad reviews already. That is just plain common sense. Still this, from my experience, is a common enough business practice, especially in some fields, not to feel too bad about it. If the OPs performance is stellar, then there should not be any worries. – closetnoc Sep 01 '17 at 17:11
I was coming here to write the same thing. Been in this place a few years ago. This is an huge red flag that people here do not respect human beings. Time to polish the CV.... – Rui F Ribeiro Nov 25 '18 at 15:30
I strongly disagree with this answer. We have no f*ing clue what is going on between Steve and the company. Maybe they honestly tried, maybe he fucked up really. We do not know. – Sascha Dec 10 '21 at 20:09
@Sascha this is not reddit or quora. You are not impressing anyone with that language, nor does it make your point any more salient. – Old_Lamplighter Dec 13 '21 at 01:48
@Old_Lamplighter: My point is that you post is full of assumptions which reflect a deformed worldview. – Sascha Dec 13 '21 at 08:07
@Sascha Better, but still not constructive, Comments here are for constructive criticism, requests for clarification, or bringing up salient points. Are you commenting that nobody can say anything about anything unless they know the complete circumstances? – Old_Lamplighter Dec 13 '21 at 13:34
I say that you go quite far in making assumptions that what the company does is shady or bad. Sometimes removing a toxic person can be a relief for a team and the co-workers suffering from it. The Original question did only indicate that it is considered unethical to fire somebody without warning, which is probably not the case - probably the real end of employment will be later. To jump from the description above to a "prepare for leaving the company" is a little far fetched, given that there is no indication how the evaluation came to pass. – Sascha Dec 13 '21 at 15:16
@Sascha The company was asking the OP to engage in clandestine operations towards his coworker. That's not an assumption, that is a fact. An example of an assumption would be that he was "Toxic", or that the "probably the real end of employment will be later". Those are assumptions. And telling someone to be prepared to move on when you have a glaring example of unethical behavior is not at all far fetched, I've had it happen to me. One job, I had a list of names who were on the chopping block, unaware that I was on another list. A company that does not act honestly, does not act honestly – Old_Lamplighter Dec 13 '21 at 15:39
@Old_Lamplighter: Ok, your personal experience explains the vitriol in your answer. I can assure you than not every company where an employee is asked to look over another employees shoulder to learn some things before that employee leaves is evil. I have seen cases where such actions were 100% justified. – Sascha Dec 13 '21 at 18:29
@Sascha There is no vitriol. The simple fact is that a company that acts in secrecy, acts in secrecy. The company, through their own actions demonstrated their nature to him. If he updated his resume and prepared to leave, he is no worse than he was when he started and he can decide to leave, or not. If he isn't ready, he could be in trouble. It is much harder to find a job when you have a job, There is nothing vitriolic about advice to that warns to be prepared. – Old_Lamplighter Dec 13 '21 at 19:16

score 64 · Answer 3 · answered Sep 01 '17 at 15:53

Setting aside the personal issues with knowing a coworker will soon be terminated (which may be troubling but really is none of your business), there is a bigger management problem here that needs to be addressed (and can coincidentally fix your dilemma as well).

The Root Problem

Based on the scenario you are describing, it seems clear there is inadequate cross-training on your team. Every manager should have plans to prepare for the "bus scenario" (as in "my associate got hit by a") as life situations will inevitably require personnel change that affects team dynamics.

People quit, get promoted/fired, get sick, go on vacation and even sometimes die. That's just a reality of life. There is no work task that your team performs that shouldn't be properly documented and have a backup person who can accomplish the work in a pinch.

Addressing your Immediate Dilemma

Under the auspices of closing this clear gap on your team, I would request that your manager make an announcement to his employees begin documenting their routine tasks that they perform and identify a "cross-training buddy" who can be responsible for being each other's backup. This will allow you to:

Meet directly with this associate for hands on cross-training
Put together an inventory of his work items that you will need to know
Possibly even give you cause for introduction to certain external parties
Address the root issue without resorting to subterfuge
Allow you to separate yourself from the personal aspects of the issue and address this need without being unfair. Keep in mind that to properly cross-train, that means you need document your own work and hold yourself to the same standards you will be demanding from this coworker. Yes, it may be a partial waste as your backup is probably not going to be around in the future but it's frankly good practice and that documentation can be passed on to this person's eventual replacement.

This solution removes you personally from any management decisions around your coworkers hiring status. It allows you to address a serious issue on your team by performing due diligence around your team's tasks. And perhaps most importantly it allows you to keep your conscience clear because, really, this is something your team should have been doing all along.

Yes, unfortunately, you may still be aware of information you really didn't want to know but unless you work for a very unfair company (in which case you probably should be looking for a new job) chances are that this individual has been digging his own grave for awhile now. Who knows... maybe if your manager sees them aggressively picking up your own tasks as backup they may change their mind about letting them go. Probably not but, really, it's not your concern. Do the right thing (for you and the company) and leave other coworker's performance concerns between them and the manager.

Good answer, it seems that this question indeed may be originated from a root problem of lack of cross training, plus the "special" way management decided to handle this. — DarkCygnus, Sep 01 '17 at 16:04
Absolutely this! +10 if I could. Have the boss make it a high priority so everyone is working on it now, not just Steve. That gives the added benefit of having everyone's processes documented for the next firing, and you'll feel better as you follow the advice in other answers and prepare for your own exit before they do this to you. — FreeMan, Sep 01 '17 at 18:36
I've worked on a small (3-5 devs) team for a few years which did almost everything in pairs. We all agreed that we produced much better results this way than alone, and we didn't feel the need for a handover when anyone left - we had ended up with a bus factor of N! — l0b0, Sep 02 '17 at 18:07
This answer is the right one. I would upvote it multiple times if I could. Mix this answer with motosubatsu's: tell management you are having a hard coming up with a covert reason to learn everything about this coworkers job, and tell them you need them to implement cross training because it will give you cover and be something good for the company that they should have done all along (so this will never be a problem again). — Azendale, Sep 04 '17 at 17:37
This is an excellent answer. +1 for thinking out of the box and coming up with a solution that addresses multiple difficult problems in a very ingenious and satisfactory way. — Tim, Sep 04 '17 at 17:40

MonkeyZeus · Answer 4 · 2017-09-01T14:45:32.560

Boss,

I am very sorry to hear about Steve's performance and the impending company action in regards to his employment but I really feel that this information should not have been disclosed to me.

However, I would be willing to moonlight Steve during this transitional period but I ask that you assign me onto tasks which would put me in direct collaboration with Steve and I will do my best to gain any knowledge about his work and clients.

I do not wish to be seen as a threat during this transitional period so I would highly prefer it if you could coordinate the task assignments instead of simply having me barge into his work. I wish to maintain complete ignorance of his employment situation.

Thank you

Additionally, notifying Steve of his impending separation from the company is a sure-fire way to get you fired later.

If this person is not a close friend of yours then, trust me, it is not worth the headache of warning that person.

Steve will not respect your decision to secretly notify him and will throw you under 10 buses before he is let go.

score 3 · Answer 5 · edited Sep 01 '17 at 15:59

First, letting him know in advance is a very poor idea. In the first place, the reason why employees are not told of firing in advance is because they have the ability to create harm in the company once they know. Suppose you told him and then he called your most profitable client and bad mouthed the company and the client left. (This is the reason why people being fired have no access to their computers or phones and are escorted out of the buildings in most companies.) Then you (as well as him) would be at fault for losing the company millions of dollars. This would likely get you fired if it was found out that you had done such a thing and if they didn't fire you, it would certainly mean they would never consider you for management because managers have to be able to keep company secrets until it is time for the official notice.

As to learning what he does, just observe as much as you can. Pay attention to where he keeps any written records like client files. Take advantage of natural ways to ask him questions. For instance, suppose something got really heated or really loud and funny. You could then casually ask what the deal was because the contact was so loud, you couldn't help but hear his side. Ask you boss for some guidance as to how far to go to learn about his job.

When he is fired, ask your company to give you access to his email so that you can see what client contacts he has had and know the history of the interactions. Get everything sent to that address forwarded to the people taking over his tasks (which is it sounds like will be you). You will likely learn more form his email than any other source. I have done this a couple of times and it was far more helpful than any other thing to get up-to-speed especially on things the person only did occasionally. If you can also get access to his computer and search through it for files that will help. Remember, these are actions taken after he is gone, but you can set it up with your boss to do that beforehand (too late after they delete everything.)

Getting access to a fellow employees email seems extremely unethical. What if there were private communications with HR having to do with medical accommodations or similar privileged topics? — Kik, Sep 01 '17 at 14:58
The company owns the email. This is done all the time. when people are fired. If you have a valid reason to look through those emails, then you have a valid reason. The Boss could go through and delete anything to/from HR first I suppose. Now in Europe where the privacy laws are more stringent than the US, It is possible that HR would need to be consulted. — HLGEM, Sep 01 '17 at 15:01
"... and then he called your most profitable client and bad mouthed the company and the client left. (This is the reason why people being fired have no access to their computers or phones and are escorted out of the buildings in most companies.)" - I'm always baffled by this apparently hostile attitude. Where I live, people are required to get at least one month's notice, and normally they work during the notice period. Nobody is escorted out of the buildings US-style, except in very rare cases. Do those bad things US employers are afraid of actually happen? — marcelm, Sep 01 '17 at 20:31
@marcelm Many companies in the US are so afraid they'll have one bad employee that they often treat all their employees as if they were going to be "that one." Sure those things happen, but I've not seen any indication they happen more frequently in the US than anywhere else. — Booga Roo, Sep 03 '17 at 19:22
@HLGEM Now in Europe where the privacy laws are more stringent than the US, It is possible that HR would need to be consulted. Not only that - it depends on the country. Usually the company must make it clear to everyone that they will be accessing company information in the emails. In some countries (Germany, France among others) accessing personal information in company email is forbidden. — WoJ, Sep 05 '17 at 13:30

score 3 · Answer 6 · edited Dec 09 '21 at 19:30

In your specific situation, I would first schedule a meeting with my boss and tell him that he put me in a ethical conflict and I am not comfortable with their approach. This is a conflict that has to be solved internally.

Try to find a solution together that works for both of you (emphasizing minimizing harm to the company against being unfair to the employee in question). Maybe your boss even has some reason for his approach you don´t know about. Maybe you can convince him that a fair and open exit-period works better with this specific employee. At least, it will let him know that you are not the person to go to for the "dirty jobs".

The benefit of this approach is you are exhibiting traits of a person of character and this impression can help further your career. At the very least you´ll have a clean conscience and sleep well at night.

You´ll want to find a company where the latter is true and leave behind the companies that require mindless drones.

score 2 · Answer 7 · edited Sep 03 '17 at 17:25

To complete the others' answers:

How a colleague will be fired is not your business.

However, the manager put you in a difficult position twice:

He told you he will
He ask you to spy on him

Telling someone that one of the colleagues will be fired is already quite a bad move since it doesn't concern you. Asking you to spy on him is utterly non-sense. If your teammates learn you spied on one of them, you can be sure they won't trust you and you won't be able to work with them.

You should push back with those arguments, or search for a new job, because as said @RichardU, if he did that to him, he may do that to you too, and he will definitively do that to some others, and ask again to spy for him.

score 0 · Answer 8 · answered Sep 03 '17 at 20:38

This is a pretty bad situation. But as unpleasent as it sounds, you are responsible for your actions.

Now, I'm not telling you to warn (or not) Steve, I'm merely suggesting that now that you have knowledge, you have some power. And the way things will unfold will partly be the consequences of your actions.

Telling him would put you in a tricky situation, and not telling him would make you a lier.

That could make you a compassionate, sadistic, cowardly or responsible human being, depending on your motivations.

The whole point of what is happening is your work environment cruelly lacks communications skill, and that is where most of things start to go wrong. So the best advice I can give is talk to your manager about the emotional conflict.

einpoklum · Answer 9 · 2017-09-24T22:33:12.390

0

You should definitely warn Steve (discretely).

... and I'm surprised other answers have not taken this position (more on that point below).

You are not your company. You do not control it, it is not acting in your best interests. It is an instrument for its owners to make a profit (and a social instrument only indirectly). You're a salaried employee, as is your co-worker Steve. You have much more in common with your co-workers in terms of collective, and probably even personal, interest than you do with company management.

I can't help to feel that I should warn Steve somehow, as it seems unethical to fire him without any previous notice (thus affecting him greatly)

Steve is subjected to the underhanded treatment of termination without notice, and the even more underhanded treatment of hiding the already-decided impending termination from him. Did you know that in most countries with any past of union movements, workers have pressed employers and government and have made this practice illegal? In quite a few places where organization is stronger, termination requires a justified cause adjudicated by a bipartisan committee of employers and employee representations (unless it's for something like stealing from work etc.)

Even though I feel like warning him, this seems to be a bad decision.

No, it is a good decision (assuming you do it carefully).

If you were to only consider your own short-term self-interest, then - why tell Steve? Who cares, right? He's getting the boot, not you, and you're afraid if you misbehave you might be punished or suffer the same fate as him.

But that's the wrong way to think about it. All of you at that company must be able to rely on each other to be supportive and helpful - as the company is inherently not. Steve is depending on you to help him out, like you may depend on others to help you out, in some other situation in which management self-interest may harm you. You should consider his interest and well-being - as well as that of his family and community.

Now, I didn't say you should try to thwart his termination; but don't betray your coworker. Rather, stick up for him. Find an opportunity to suggest that you guys talk after work, not at the workplace, and explain the situation. You will also get a lot more information from him, which currently you're not getting. This will also help you decide what you want to tell your manager - that you'll oblige, that you can't, that there's this or that kind of problem etc.

I'd even say you should talk to Steve before discussing this again with your manager. Coordinate with your fellow workers first, and with management later.

_{^{I believe this is the result of the combination of two factors. The first being that most users / answer authors on this site, and this page particularly, are from the USA; and the second is the ever-continuing weakening of working-class organization and education in the US. Pro-employer mores and social conceptions face you wherever you turn - in the lawbooks, from the politicians, the businesspeople of course, the courts, the collaborationist corporatized unions, even the education system.}}

edited Sep 24 '17 at 22:33

answered Sep 05 '17 at 13:20

einpoklum

533
2
14

1

This is horrible advice. It is not your job to tell someone they are fired, and doing so without your bosses instruction will completely destroy your relationship with management. See this question, this question, and this question. – David K Sep 05 '17 at 13:32
When you sign a contract, it is written there (or regulated by law) how termination can be handled. This may include "on the spot". You may not be happy with it but this is the law. Your alternative is either to join a political party which wants to change the labor law in you country or relocate somewhere else (or have a better contract). Your advice is to be an outlaw. It would be better if the current bolded title of your answer was "#YOLO, be an outlaw, tell him!" – WoJ Sep 05 '17 at 13:34
@DavidK: It is not your job, because the employer gives you your job. But it is your responsibility. If not you, then whom? – einpoklum Sep 05 '17 at 13:43
@WoJ: Contracts are signed by inherently unequal parties with some inherently opposing interests - a worker and an employer. The worker is not at liberty to not work anywhere - s/he must work somewhere, to sustain his/herself. If that weren't the case people would not sign contracts in which other people can give them orders and have them spy on their coworkers etc. – einpoklum Sep 05 '17 at 13:49
Also, of course the law is very much slanted in favor of Capital - that is the social system we live in. When labor organizing started in the US they were found by the courts to be criminal conspiracies to increase wages... (Commonwealth v. Pullis) Still, in light of your comment about my bolded title, I added a caveat for safety. – einpoklum Sep 05 '17 at 13:50
1

@einpoklum "If not you, then whom?" Your boss, who is responsible for hiring and firing. – David K Sep 05 '17 at 13:53
1

@einpoklum: I can agree to some of the elements in your comment (to a more or less large extend depending on the countries). What you are saying in your answer is to do something illegal. This cannot be a general advice - in order to change things either you start a revolution, or you go though legal means to have the law changed. – WoJ Sep 05 '17 at 14:16
@DavidK: Well, not your boss, since he's keeping the information from Steve. So, again, whom? – einpoklum Sep 05 '17 at 14:25
1

@einpoklum YES your boss. It is his responsibility to decide when and how to share the information with Steve. IMO, the boss shouldn't have told the OP anything, but if the boss has instructed the OP not to share the information with Steve, then those are the instructions that need to be followed. – David K Sep 05 '17 at 14:28
@WoJ: You don't need to be revolutionary to do right by your coworker Steve. Also, this is not illegal. In many states in the world it is the employer who is actually acting illegally. In some states it might be a breach of contract, or it might not be. I believe it is socially and morally justified - and even imperative - regardless of the legal question. – einpoklum Sep 05 '17 at 14:29
@DavidK: 1. It is the boss' responsibility vis a vis the company, not vis-a-vis the workers (individually and collectively). Remember the first part of my answer: Those are two inherently conflicted parties. It is the workers' responsibility to countermand these kinds of underhanded company behavior which runs against their collective social interests. Now, if the boss hadn't told OP anything, I wouldn't suggest OP routinely hack his boss' computer to get that kind information, but if he knows - then he knows, and should act. – einpoklum Sep 05 '17 at 14:31
@DavidK: 2. "then those are the instructions that need to be followed" Those are indeed the instructions, but you should definitely not follow instructions just because they were given. If they're not justified in your view, you try to not follow them, balancing the strength of your objections with the risk of getting penalized if caught. – einpoklum Sep 05 '17 at 14:36
1

I have to say, while I don't agree with this answer (and I think it could do without the editorial stab at "the weakness of working class organization and education in the US"), I am at least thankful that someone's expressed an opposing viewpoint. – BiscuitBaker Sep 05 '17 at 14:56
@BiscuitBaker: This editorialization is a better alternative than starting a "comment flame war" with other answers. It's a toning-down of what I really feel like saying. Also, it should be noted that even posting an answer like this here is somewhat personally risky, since employers can figure out my account name relatively easily. – einpoklum Sep 05 '17 at 15:21
@einpoklum I hope you don't feel attacked by my suggestion or anything, that part really is just me offering my opinion on a potential improvement. I genuinely did just want to thank you for your contribution in light of the downvotes, regardless of whether I agree or not. – BiscuitBaker Sep 05 '17 at 15:33
1

@BiscuitBaker: See edit. – einpoklum Sep 05 '17 at 16:04
I'd be more okay with this answer if OP had an accepted job offer somewhere else, first. Not down-voting because, at the very least, OP should be looking to get the heck out of that company. – PoloHoleSet Sep 05 '17 at 16:13
@PoloHoleSet: Of course it would be safer if OP had an anchor elsewhere, but - you can't always plan ahead like that and OP has to play the hand he was dealt. I say he should take the high road. – einpoklum Sep 05 '17 at 18:07
I understand that. To my mind, the high road would be not spying on him. Specifically going against orders not to disclose something confidential is a bit more murky and risky. – PoloHoleSet Sep 05 '17 at 18:14

score -1 · Answer 10 · answered Dec 10 '21 at 20:16

I will really keep it short:

Your company pays you to do your job. Steve does not. You don't know what happened between him and the company. If in general you have the feeling that the company does not think about firing people well, then it is not a long term place for you anyway. If in general the company ethics is ok, then firing Steve still could be an honest mistake, but to jump to the conclusion that informing him is an appropriate course of action is a mistake. Until you have hard indication that there is foul play, assume that Steven contributed his part here.

It could even be that it is better for him in that way (e.g. a neutral firing without an previous warning of an employee who is stealing/harassing colleagues/otherwise unbearable is better for both sides than having the fight stretch out).

score -2 · Answer 11 · answered Sep 01 '17 at 15:27

I've seen similar scenarios occur at work.

From your boss' perspective, firing Steve without notice or warning...

carries risk of litigation
disrupts workflow, as you will have to replace him without a managed transition
gives off a bad PR vibe about the company, especially if Steve rants on social media
will put Steve in a Very Bad Mood, and might cause him to make some impulsive choices like leaking company info to the competition out of spite
also carries the risk of Steve running off to the competition with all his clients

Thus, it is not something you do lightly. In fact, it is preferable not to do it at all, even though firing people is not a "nice" thing to do, there is no reason to also be extra-rude with a kick in the butt on top.

Unless there's a very good (or not so good) reason, for example:

Your Boss kinda "surprised" Steve and his/her spouse "doing things together" and thus your boss holds a bit of a personal grudge. PROTIP: stay out of the line of fire, maybe you will be in your boss' seat in 6 months, or at least get some entertainment.
Steve stole company property. When one of our sales guy got all the computer equipment "stolen" from the boot of his car three weeks in a row, we began to grow a liiiiitle bit suspicious. When it turned out he had used the company's UPS account to ship the stolen goods to his accomplices' personal address, weeeelll, you get the idea. PROTIP: it is preferable to be "interviewed as a witness" by THE LAW, instead of "interrogated as a suspect." If Steve did indeed put himself on the wrong side of the law, warning him can make you an accomplice, or at least a suspect.
Your boss has a gut feeling that if he's warned, Steve will retaliate and do undesirable things like wipe out the production servers. In this case, you can always ask your boss about it, maybe there is a legit reason after all. Or maybe you'll wish you didn't ask.

All these are examples of Steve being the bad guy (except maybe the first one!). However, Steve could also be the good guy:

Steve did nothing wrong, he's just "not good enough" at doing his job, which is a valid reason to fire him... But the boss is a sadist and wants to make it personal.
Steve deeply offended your boss by going over his head and making an Excellent Suggestion to the higher-ups. He should have told his boss, who would then have marketed it as his own idea... After having "a talk" with his boss, Steve is now a bit disillusioned, that's why his performance suffers.
Steve has cancer, diabetes, or any expensive disease, and the company doesn't feel like paying for his medical insurance anymore (depends on local regulations).
The company screwed him on overtime or bonuses, or maybe his stock options, and they don't want him to be able to gather evidence to be used in litigation if he suspects his imminent demise. In this case, start polishing your curriculum, and of course gather evidence to sue them when they will pull the same trick on you.
Some higher-up wants to shoehorn in a friend or relative, and someone has to go to make some room...
Steve commited capital thoughtcrime and will thus get steamrolled. Pick a side.

So, unless you discover the real reason... If Steve is your best buddy from high school and you value his well-being more than the risk involved in tell him, then tell him.

Otherwise, don't.

What? Firing is typically done without notice or warning. That's practically what "fired" means—the employee didn't know it was coming. Otherwise it's a layoff. This answer doesn't make much sense to me. — user428517, Sep 01 '17 at 19:16
Hmmm, OK, I have just learned a new nuance in English vocabulary, so thanks for that! — bobflux, Sep 01 '17 at 19:35

score -2 · Answer 12 · answered Sep 01 '17 at 16:57

"Steve," doesn't seem to care that his performance is sub-par. In his position, he's helping your company lose business. It sounds to me that he already knows he's going to be dismissed and he wants to be.

You can help yourself and, "Steve," and meet your boss's expectations by helping to mentor, "Steve," and improve his performance. If he steps up and retains his job, great! If he steps up, but still loses his job, you've done what was expected of you, and more. If he fails to perform, then it is obvious that he has no interest in improving the company's performance and he should go.

At this point, you should view, "Steve," as you would a competitor. He is not on your side.

As for this nonsense about the risk of firing him and lawsuits, etc., you must remember that having a job is a privilege, not a right. In many states, you can be fired at any time, for no reason. Employers aren't obligated to keep people on staff who work to bring the company to failure. They sure aren't obligated to keep people on staff who don't do what they are asked and paid to do.

It isn't YOUR job to determine whether or not his dismissal is right and just. That has already been done. But, you can correct "Steve's" behavior and help him, whether it is for this job and this company, or the next.

One additional note: if "Steve" is a malingerer and he has done things that you've observed are illegal but didn't say anything, then you are guilty of willful blindness (that is a crime). Depending on your company and the industry you're in, you could be held responsible for not exposing his activities. This training period is your chance to learn if anything like that is going on.

Don't like it? Start your own company and run it according to your own standards. You hire people and you pay them to not perform.

Mentoring hims seems to be a good suggestion, although the rest of your post reads a bit strong — DarkCygnus, Sep 01 '17 at 17:02
"Steve," doesn't seem to care that his performance is sub-par. In his position, he's helping your company lose business. It sounds to me that he already knows he's going to be dismissed and he wants to be." - What the hell? You don't know any of that. You're making all sorts of assumptions about Steve that you have no way of knowing and are likely wrong. There are many reasons his performance may be lower than expected, and "he wants to be fired" is the very last one I can think of. You have no right to make such assumptions and present them as fact. — marcelm, Sep 02 '17 at 19:28

Asked to secretly obtain coworker's knowledge before he gets fired

12 Answers12

You should definitely warn Steve (discretely).

Linked