jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (6 posts)

Disgruntled Former Employees.

  1. flacoinohio profile image84
    flacoinohioposted 2 years ago

    My community pool recently went through some changes that involved hiring outside an management company to manage our daily pool operations.   The management company offered all of the staff employed by our community positions before accepting applications from other applicants.  The managers and staff all declined positions, but have recently started coming to our pool as guests of members.  During their visits, they have all attempted to interfere with pool operations, demanded to inspect pool operation logs, and filed complaints about pool operating systems that have been replaced  or repaired within the past 90 days.  I do not understand why they are behaving this way, each employee was offered a position with the new company with paid training, a wage increase, and each staff member would retain their former position to include management positions.  I guess I don't understand their rational for intentionally interfering with current pool staff and managers when they chose to not accept positions they willingly applied for and then declined en-mass a week before the staff training began.

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Tell them, formally, to submit their requests for information to the Board of Directors for consideration as they have time to accumulate the data.  When the requests become overwhelming, the Board can (and should) decline to allow those people onto common grounds in the HOA.

  2. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago

    People are rarely disgruntled about nothing.  I bet they were not offered their jobs under the same pay and condition.  So they are using their inside knowledge as a form of protest.  Ask your management company what to do about it. They are the ones meant to have the expertise now.

    1. flacoinohio profile image84
      flacoinohioposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      With the entirety of the older employees declining all at once, the former manager was expecting the Association to panic and call her and the other guards to sake them to return.  Three of last years new guards informed us that the former manager called them and specifically told them not to work for the new pool management company and to wait for a call from her when she has negotiated being rehired by the Board.  The pay and hours with the new company are better, manager is only in charge of their shift.  So a management position with the new company would not be the same as the former Association management position.

      1. psycheskinner profile image82
        psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I really doubt that replacement jobs they were offered were not at the same pay and benefits? These services get bids by cutting cost and not providing benefits. Maybe a bit more an hour, but no health insurance etc. The "shift" manager gets seriously downgraded. That is why people drop their long time staff and use these outfits.

        To resolve conflicts, respect grievances. The more salt gets rubbed in, the longer they will keep this up.

        1. GA Anderson profile image87
          GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Your experience with management companies must have been a lot different from mine. Throughout a career in the Restaurant and Hospitality business, I have had multiple experiences with management companies.

          I have found the primary reasons for using them were convenience and expertise. They provide a service, and it is not always substantially cheaper to use them. And typically, (from my experience), they do offer comparative pay and benefits. The described change from general manager to shift manager fits the picture of a conversion to a management company. As does the efficiency of cutting non-productive positions.

          Management companies generally succeed through proficiency and efficiency - not staffing with the lowest cost employees. That only leads to poor employee performance and high employee turn-over rates - both costly and possibly deadly for a management company. (or any other business)

          So no, I don't think, "These services get bids by cutting cost and not providing benefits." is a generally accurate description. Of course you may have had a different experience, but I don't think it represents the norm.