Recently, the &nbsp;Deloitte Global Human Capital Trends report said that 64 per cent of career professionals think performance reviews are a “complete waste of time that doesn’t help them perform better.” This is echoed in other recent studies and developments, leading to a similar conclusion: top performers are finding appraisals and performance reviews unhelpful, often leading to low morale and job jumping.<h2>Why are top performers rejecting performance reviews?</h2>There’s a credibility crisis in the performance review systems of companies, and it’s the best employees who are most vocal about this. While intended to improve productivity and guide growth, these systems are seen as outdated, unfair, and even harmful, according to recent analyses.Research by AI-driven firm Acorn found that four out of five corporate leaders admit that even top performers “must leave their company to get promoted or earn higher pay.” It also found that only 29 per cent of employees trust how their performance is evaluated, while a disturbing 60 per cent believe their metrics are unfair. Still, 66 per cent of executives in the US remain confident in these systems, according to the study.<h2>Appraisals are driving talent out of organisations</h2>“Performance reviews are not just broken, they are driving talent out the door,” says Keith Metcalfe, President of Acorn, adding, “We don’t need another HR process. We need real capability systems that map what people can do, what they need to learn, and how that moves the business forward.”<h2>Everything can’t be quantified: How input at workplace is reduced to scoring systems</h2>According to Yad Senapathy, CEO of the Project Management Training Institute, most performance reviews summarise complex input into inflexible scoring systems, often missing context, such as leadership changes or resource gaps. “What used to be a growth checkpoint now has the flavour of a compliance exercise. This misalignment promotes disengagement, and ultimately attrition,” he said.<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gen-z-dreams-crushed-by-job-crisis-shocking-truth-behind-their-job-crisis-1755748767981/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/gen-z-dreams-crushed-by-job-crisis-shocking-truth-behind-their-job-crisis-1755748767981/embed</a><h2>How layoffs over 'performance' and forced 'bell curves' are killing enthusiasm</h2>According to recent reports, companies like Meta laid off thousands of employees based on performance, including those who had recently received glowing reviews. At TikTok parent ByteDance, forced performance metrics—known as bell curves—limit top scores, leaving many high performers rated lower to fit these arbitrary distribution models.In a pointed remark, Lisa Sterling, Chief People Officer at Perceptyx, said that a “once-a-year scorecard doesn’t help anyone get better. It doesn’t build capability and doesn’t keep top talent engaged.” She added that traditional reviews “aren’t conversations about growth.”Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/why-gen-z-are-finding-it-harder-than-ever-to-land-first-job-graduate-unemployment-hits-37-year-high-in-us-1755606828918">Why Gen Z are finding it harder than ever to land first job? Graduate unemployment hits 37-year high in US</a><h2>What are employees seeking from organisations?</h2>According to reports, employees are seeking continuous feedback, clarity about their impact, and real opportunities for development. But instead, they often receive surprise feedback about events that happened months earlier.“If I only gave my kids feedback once or twice a year, they would never grow. Employees are no different,” Lisa was quoted as saying in a report in Quartz.Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/beyond-soft-skills-the-rise-of-meta-skills-in-the-workplace-8943927">Beyond Soft Skills: The Rise of Meta-Skills in the Workplace</a><h2>Can salaries be separated from performance reviews?</h2>“Performance systems done wrong drain your bench. Done right, they build it,” Sterling said, as experts advocated separating salary from performance conversations, training managers to act as coaches, and shifting focus from static ratings to employee readiness for future roles.Feedback should be timely, specific, and tied to real business outcomes, they say.Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/-must-have-ability-to-work-24-7-indian-billionaire-reignites-work-life-balance-debate-narayana-murthy-s-70-hour-work-week-1756360164363">'Must have ability to work 24/7': Indian billionaire reignites work-life balance debate</a><h2>Performance reviews are not tribunals, but should be partnership building</h2>The Quartz article quoted Amy Mosher, Chief People Officer at isolved, stressing that reviews should feel like partnerships, not performance tribunals.The feedback should be transparent, fair, and growth-focused, the experts noted. This way, organisations can rebuild trust and retain their strongest talent.The only way for companies to keep their best people is to replace rigid review systems with dynamic, human-centred approaches that foster real growth, not just compliance.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Top performers in compnies are living after performance reviews seen as outdated and unfair. A Deloitte insigt report said 64 per cent of professionals find appraisals unhelpful, with only 29 per cent trusting evaluations. Whats the way to  retain talent and foster real growth?

Recently, the Deloitte Global Human Capital Trends report said that 64 per cent of career professionals think performance reviews are a “complete waste of time that doesn’t help them perform better.” This is echoed in other recent studies and developments, leading to a similar conclusion: top performers are finding appraisals and performance reviews unhelpful, often leading to low morale and job jumping. Why are top performers rejecting performance reviews? There’s a credibility crisis in the performance review systems of companies, and it’s the best employees who are most vocal about this. While intended to improve productivity and guide growth, these systems are seen as outdated, unfair, and even harmful, according to recent analyses. Research by AI-driven firm Acorn found that four out of five corporate leaders admit that even top performers “must leave their company to get promoted or earn higher pay.” It also found that only 29 per cent of employees trust how their performance is evaluated, while a disturbing 60 per cent believe their metrics are unfair. Still, 66 per cent of executives in the US remain confident in these systems, according to the study. Appraisals are driving talent out of organisations “Performance reviews are not just broken, they are driving talent out the door,” says Keith Metcalfe, President of Acorn, adding, “We don’t need another HR process. We need real capability systems that map what people can do, what they need to learn, and how that moves the business forward.” Everything can’t be quantified: How input at workplace is reduced to scoring systems According to Yad Senapathy, CEO of the Project Management Training Institute, most performance reviews summarise complex input into inflexible scoring systems, often missing context, such as leadership changes or resource gaps. “What used to be a growth checkpoint now has the flavour of a compliance exercise. This misalignment promotes disengagement, and ultimately attrition,” he said. https://www.wionews.com/videos/gen-z-dreams-crushed-by-job-crisis-shocking-truth-behind-their-job-crisis-1755748767981/embed How layoffs over 'performance' and forced 'bell curves' are killing enthusiasm According to recent reports, companies like Meta laid off thousands of employees based on performance, including those who had recently received glowing reviews. At TikTok parent ByteDance, forced performance metrics—known as bell curves—limit top scores, leaving many high performers rated lower to fit these arbitrary distribution models. In a pointed remark, Lisa Sterling, Chief People Officer at Perceptyx, said that a “once-a-year scorecard doesn’t help anyone get better. It doesn’t build capability and doesn’t keep top talent engaged.” She added that traditional reviews “aren’t conversations about growth.” Also read: Why Gen Z are finding it harder than ever to land first job? Graduate unemployment hits 37-year high in US What are employees seeking from organisations? According to reports, employees are seeking continuous feedback, clarity about their impact, and real opportunities for development. But instead, they often receive surprise feedback about events that happened months earlier. “If I only gave my kids feedback once or twice a year, they would never grow. Employees are no different,” Lisa was quoted as saying in a report in Quartz. Also read: Beyond Soft Skills: The Rise of Meta-Skills in the Workplace Can salaries be separated from performance reviews? “Performance systems done wrong drain your bench. Done right, they build it,” Sterling said, as experts advocated separating salary from performance conversations, training managers to act as coaches, and shifting focus from static ratings to employee readiness for future roles. Feedback should be timely, specific, and tied to real business outcomes, they say. Also read: 'Must have ability to work 24/7': Indian billionaire reignites work-life balance debate Performance reviews are not tribunals, but should be partnership building The Quartz article quoted Amy Mosher, Chief People Officer at isolved, stressing that reviews should feel like partnerships, not performance tribunals. The feedback should be transparent, fair, and growth-focused, the experts noted. This way, organisations can rebuild trust and retain their strongest talent. The only way for companies to keep their best people is to replace rigid review systems with dynamic, human-centred approaches that foster real growth, not just compliance.

Top performers in compnies are living after performance reviews seen as outdated and unfair. A Deloitte insigt report said 64 per cent of professionals find appraisals unhelpful, with only 29 per cent trusting evaluations. Whats the way to &nbsp;retain talent and foster real growth?

The curse of the Bell Curve: Appraisals are making top performers leave firms, as they find it 'a complete waste of time'

When the phrase "employee with ADHD" comes to mind, the image conjured up is often that of a dishevelled whirlwind, consistently arriving late, and perennially missing deadlines. The infamous Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, or ADHD, is saddled with a plethora of misconceptions that breed unjust judgments.

ADHD patients encounter heightened joblessness and a merry-go-round of job transitions, often finding themselves on the sidelines when higher-paying opportunities arise.

Indeed, the neurologically-influenced tendencies of employees can lead to erratic job hops, but is there a way for corporations to cultivate a more sustainable work environment for their valued employees with ADHD?

<h2>I’ll admit it. They do cause problems.</h2>

The UK's leading research centre in this matter, The ADHD Centre, sheds light on the fact that adults diagnosed with ADHD face approximately 60% higher chances of termination, about 30% increased likelihood of encountering ongoing or chronic employment problems, and are three times more prone to resign impulsively.

These disruptions often stem from a lack of diagnosis: it's essential for more individuals to seek testing if they recognise symptoms.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/losing-your-zen-at-work-the-mental-health-struggle-589093">Losing your Zen at work: The mental health struggle</a>

Moreover, offices are ill-prepared to handle these situations. Instead of terminating or discouraging these employees, it's crucial to acknowledge the unique value they bring to the table: something a neurotypical person may not offer.&nbsp;

We need to switch workspaces up. Try to keep the ADHD workers engaged in their jobs.&nbsp;

<h2>“Why don’t you make a list?”&nbsp;</h2>

If only people with ADHD had a dollar for everytime they heard this. Conventional advice can be the most counterproductive for some ADHD-affected people and needs to be debunked.&nbsp;

No, they do not need to go to a quieter room, they will snooze.&nbsp;

They do not need a cubicle with lesser distractions, they will go the extra mile to find distractions.&nbsp;

Positive reinforcement is ineffective for ADHD. A neurodiverse brain doesn't speed up with rewards for tasks.&nbsp;

Lists overwhelm; give micro lists like "Proofread Document C" instead of “Finish proofreading.”&nbsp;

Although conventional focusing methods&nbsp;work for some people, these are&nbsp;new alternatives for those who have confined themselves to all sorts of disciplinary methods without any success.&nbsp;

Apart from counselling and medications, employers can use workplace strategies to aid their workers.&nbsp;

<h2>Employers involve yourselves</h2>

In the realm of ADHD, distractions come in three ways: daydreaming, task-switching, and the “Guys I have an idea!”&nbsp; 
Employers and colleagues should watch out for and interrupt the first two but let the third flourish.

Embracing neurodivergence means relishing the out-of-the-box thinking that sparks from them.&nbsp;

For individuals with ADHD to truly excel in the workplace, providing them with a flexible work schedule is a game-changer.&nbsp;

The phenomenon known as "hyperfocus" comes into play, allowing them to unleash their best work, diving deep into a state of intense concentration for hours on end. Hyperfocus cannot be summoned.&nbsp;

By allowing them to work at their optimal time, the probability of their hyperfocus hours aligning with their working hours increases significantly.&nbsp;

<h2>Face the music</h2>

Most people with ADHD actually need distractions, emphasise on the right ones, to work better.&nbsp; 
For example, music distracts some, but helps some others focus: maybe a specific genre or just instrumentals to focus.&nbsp;

It all boils down to one basic concept: if a person with ADHD is bored, they will find it nearly impossible to work because they have no dopamine, the happy hormone.

Brighter and more creatively adorned office spaces wouldn't hurt a single employee, especially ADHD workers.&nbsp; 
Sterile environments can lead them to tap out, losing focus and productivity.

ADHD employees need to stop fighting the distractions and embrace the ones that help focus.&nbsp;

Fill their desk with fidget toys, shake their legs as much as they need to, stand if they need to, sit in an area with white noise, whatever it takes to stabilise focus and remain stimulated.&nbsp;

To optimise productivity, they can schedule tedious tasks during times of maximum dopamine release, such as after doing something enjoyable or a fun lunch break.&nbsp;

A flexible work schedule can also play a vital role in completing boring work, as employees can arrive at the office after a stimulating activity, like going to the gym.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/lifestyle/news-_-out-of-every-2-indian-corporate-employees-at-high-risk-for-poor-mental-health-mental-health-awareness-month-591719">1 in every 2 Indian corporate employees at high risk for poor mental health: Survey</a>

With heightened awareness, a joint effort from both employees and companies, and enhanced healthcare support, we can bridge the gap and pave the way for ADHD workers to attain job stability and security.&nbsp;

They think “outside the box”, we just need to let them work outside it too.

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

When the phrase "employee with ADHD" comes to mind, the image conjured up is often that of a dishevelled whirlwind, consistently arriving late, and perennially missing deadlines.

When the phrase "employee with ADHD" comes to mind, the image conjured up is often that of a dishevelled whirlwind, consistently arriving late, and perennially missing deadlines. The infamous Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, or ADHD, is saddled with a plethora of misconceptions that breed unjust judgments. ADHD patients encounter heightened joblessness and a merry-go-round of job transitions, often finding themselves on the sidelines when higher-paying opportunities arise. Indeed, the neurologically-influenced tendencies of employees can lead to erratic job hops, but is there a way for corporations to cultivate a more sustainable work environment for their valued employees with ADHD? I’ll admit it. They do cause problems. The UK's leading research centre in this matter, The ADHD Centre, sheds light on the fact that adults diagnosed with ADHD face approximately 60% higher chances of termination, about 30% increased likelihood of encountering ongoing or chronic employment problems, and are three times more prone to resign impulsively. These disruptions often stem from a lack of diagnosis: it's essential for more individuals to seek testing if they recognise symptoms. Also read | Losing your Zen at work: The mental health struggle Moreover, offices are ill-prepared to handle these situations. Instead of terminating or discouraging these employees, it's crucial to acknowledge the unique value they bring to the table: something a neurotypical person may not offer. We need to switch workspaces up. Try to keep the ADHD workers engaged in their jobs. “Why don’t you make a list?” If only people with ADHD had a dollar for everytime they heard this. Conventional advice can be the most counterproductive for some ADHD-affected people and needs to be debunked. No, they do not need to go to a quieter room, they will snooze. They do not need a cubicle with lesser distractions, they will go the extra mile to find distractions. Positive reinforcement is ineffective for ADHD. A neurodiverse brain doesn't speed up with rewards for tasks. Lists overwhelm; give micro lists like "Proofread Document C" instead of “Finish proofreading.” Although conventional focusing methods work for some people, these are new alternatives for those who have confined themselves to all sorts of disciplinary methods without any success. Apart from counselling and medications, employers can use workplace strategies to aid their workers. Employers involve yourselves In the realm of ADHD, distractions come in three ways: daydreaming, task-switching, and the “Guys I have an idea!” Employers and colleagues should watch out for and interrupt the first two but let the third flourish. Embracing neurodivergence means relishing the out-of-the-box thinking that sparks from them. For individuals with ADHD to truly excel in the workplace, providing them with a flexible work schedule is a game-changer. The phenomenon known as "hyperfocus" comes into play, allowing them to unleash their best work, diving deep into a state of intense concentration for hours on end. Hyperfocus cannot be summoned. By allowing them to work at their optimal time, the probability of their hyperfocus hours aligning with their working hours increases significantly. Face the music Most people with ADHD actually need distractions, emphasise on the right ones, to work better. For example, music distracts some, but helps some others focus: maybe a specific genre or just instrumentals to focus. It all boils down to one basic concept: if a person with ADHD is bored, they will find it nearly impossible to work because they have no dopamine, the happy hormone. Brighter and more creatively adorned office spaces wouldn't hurt a single employee, especially ADHD workers. Sterile environments can lead them to tap out, losing focus and productivity. ADHD employees need to stop fighting the distractions and embrace the ones that help focus. Fill their desk with fidget toys, shake their legs as much as they need to, stand if they need to, sit in an area with white noise, whatever it takes to stabilise focus and remain stimulated. To optimise productivity, they can schedule tedious tasks during times of maximum dopamine release, such as after doing something enjoyable or a fun lunch break. A flexible work schedule can also play a vital role in completing boring work, as employees can arrive at the office after a stimulating activity, like going to the gym. Also read | 1 in every 2 Indian corporate employees at high risk for poor mental health: Survey With heightened awareness, a joint effort from both employees and companies, and enhanced healthcare support, we can bridge the gap and pave the way for ADHD workers to attain job stability and security. They think “outside the box”, we just need to let them work outside it too. (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.) WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

A blessing in distraction? Can ADHD-driven minds excel in workplaces?

A year ago, Tara Jones, an Amazon warehouse worker in Oklahoma, cradled her newborn, glanced over her pay stub on her phone and noticed that she had been underpaid by a significant chunk: $90 out of $540.

The mistake kept repeating even after she reported the issue. Jones, who had taken accounting classes at community college, grew so exasperated that she wrote an email to Jeff Bezos, the company’s founder.

“I’m behind on bills, all because the pay team messed up,” she wrote weeks later. “I’m crying as I write this email.”

Unbeknown to Jones, her message to Bezos set off an internal investigation, and a discovery: Jones was far from alone. For at least 1 1/2 years — including during periods of record profit — Amazon had been shortchanging new parents, patients dealing with medical crises and other vulnerable workers on leave, according to a confidential report on the findings. Some of the pay calculations at her facility had been wrong since it opened its doors over a year before. As many as 179 of the companies’ other warehouses had potentially been affected, too.

Amazon is still identifying and repaying workers to this day, according to Kelly Nantel, a company spokesperson.

That error is only one strand in a long-standing knot of problems with Amazon’s system for handling paid and unpaid leaves, according to dozens of interviews and hundreds of pages of internal documents obtained by The New York Times. Together, the records and interviews reveal that the issues have been more widespread — affecting the company’s blue-collar and white-collar workers — and more harmful than previously known, amounting to what several company insiders described as one of its gravest human resources problems.

Workers across the country facing medical problems and other life crises have been fired when the attendance software mistakenly marked them as no-shows, according to former and current human resources staff members, some who would speak only anonymously for fear of retribution. Doctors’ notes vanished into black holes in Amazon’s databases. Employees struggled to even reach their case managers, wading through automated phone trees that routed their calls to overwhelmed back-office staff in Costa Rica, India and Las Vegas. And the whole leave system was run on a patchwork of programs that often did not speak to one another.

Some workers who were ready to return found that the system was too backed up to process them, resulting in weeks or months of lost income. Higher-paid corporate employees, who had to navigate the same systems, found that arranging a routine leave could turn into a morass.

In internal correspondence, company administrators warned of “inadequate service levels,” “deficient processes” and systems that are “prone to delay and error.”

The extent of the problem puts in stark relief how Amazon’s workers routinely took a back seat to customers during the company’s meteoric rise to retail dominance. Amazon built cutting-edge package processing facilities to cater to shoppers’ appetite for fast delivery, far outpacing competitors. But the business did not devote enough resources and attention to how it served employees, according to many longtime workers.

“A lot of times, because we’ve optimized for the customer experience, we’ve been focused on that,” Bethany Reyes, who was recently put in charge of fixing the leave system, said in an interview. She stressed that the company was working hard to rebalance those priorities.

The company’s treatment of its huge workforce — now more than 1.3 million people and expanding rapidly — faces mounting scrutiny. Labor activists and some lawmakers say that the company does not adequately protect the safety of warehouse employees, and that it unfairly punishes internal critics. This year, workers in Alabama, upset about the company’s minute-by-minute monitoring of their productivity, organized a serious, although ultimately failed, unionization threat against the company.

In June, a Times investigation detailed how badly the leave process jammed during the pandemic, finding that it was one of many employment lapses during the company’s greatest moment of financial success. Since then, Amazon has emphasized a pledge to become “Earth’s best employer.” Andy Jassy, who replaced Bezos as CEO in July, recently singled out the leave system as a place where it can demonstrate its commitment to improve. The process “didn’t work the way we wanted it to work,” he said at an event this month.

In response to the more recent findings on the troubles in its leave program, Amazon elaborated on its efforts to fix the system’s “pain points” and “pay issues,” as Reyes put it in the interview. She called the erroneous terminations “the most dire issue that you could have.” The company is hiring hundreds of employees, streamlining and connecting systems, clarifying its communications and training human resources staff members to be more empathetic.

But many issues persist, causing breakdowns that have proved devastating. This spring, a Tennessee warehouse worker abruptly stopped receiving disability payments, leaving his family struggling to pay for food, transportation or medical care.

“Not a word that there had ever been a problem,” said James Watts, 54, who worked at Amazon in Chattanooga for six years before repeated heart attacks and strokes forced him to go on disability leave. The sudden loss of his benefits caused a cascade of calamities: Because he was without pay for two weeks, his car was repossessed. To afford food and doctors’ bills, Watts and his wife sold their wedding rings.

“We’re losing everything,” he said.

The benefits restarted without explanation several months later, but the couple are still struggling to regain their footing. Nantel said that Amazon regretted Watts’ situation, that the process was too confusing and that it was working to simplify the process of navigating leaves.

As the country’s second largest private employer, Amazon offers a wide array of leaves — paid or unpaid, medical or personal, legally mandated or not. While Amazon used to outsource the management of its leave programs, it brought the effort in-house when providers could not keep up with its growth. It is now one of the largest leave administrators in the country.

Employees apply for leaves online, on an internal app, or wade through automated phone trees. The technology that Amazon uses to manage leaves is a patchwork of software from a variety of companies — including Salesforce, Oracle and Kronos — that do not connect seamlessly.

That complexity forces human resource employees to input many approved leaves, an effort that last fall alone required 67 full-time employees, an internal document shows. Reyes said a permanent bridge between the programs is scheduled to be completed in March, with incremental improvements in the meantime.

Current and former employees involved in administering leaves say that the company’s answer has often been to push them so hard that some required leaves themselves. Last year, in an email sent out on a Friday about a Sunday deadline, a corporate manager of the leave system scolded his teams to do more.

“You all know what needs to be accomplished and by when,” he wrote. “No exceptions!”

Reyes said that employee burnout was a huge concern of hers as she was taking on her new role and that she was trying to address it in several ways.

Amazon’s own teams have not always been well-versed in the system, internal documents show. An external assessment last fall found that the back-office staff members who talk with employees “do not understand” the process for taking leaves and regularly gave incorrect information to workers. In one audited call, which dragged on for 29 minutes, the phone agent told a worker that he was too new to be eligible for short-term disability leave, when in fact workers are eligible from their first day.

Reyes said that with improved training, her teams could now resolve more than nine out of 10 issues on the first call.

In some cases, Amazon has been accused of violating the law. In 2017, Leslie Tullis, who managed a subscription product for children, faced a mounting domestic violence crisis and requested an unpaid leave that employers must offer under Washington state law to protect victims. Once approved, Tullis would be allowed to work intermittently; she could be absent from work as much as necessary, and with little notice; and she would be protected against retaliation.

Amazon granted the leave, but the company did not seem to understand what it had said yes to. It had no policy that corresponded to the law of the company’s home state, court documents show. Tullis said she spent as many as eight hours a week dealing with the company to manage her leave. At one point, she was moving regularly to keep her children safe. Despite the legal protections, her bosses would become visibly frustrated when she was behind on work, “like I was betraying them every day,” she said.

 
In June 2019, after she took two days of leave to deal with the latest emergency in a continuing family crisis just before a performance plan was due, she was fired for missing the deadline by two days. The Washington state attorney general’s office took up her case, calling Amazon’s leave reporting system “a failure” and arguing that the company retaliated in violation of the state law.

Amazon is fighting the case. Nantel said the company gave Tullis flexibility and support, as well as the equivalent of about seven months of unpaid leave over two years. She said Tullis was fired not in retaliation but because her performance faltered while she was not on leave.

Just before she was dismissed, she emailed her manager, stunned that the deadline was not pushed back to accommodate the exact type of crisis the leave law was intended to protect. “Domestic violence is a series of emergencies,” Tullis wrote in an email, “and the victims don’t get to pick when it ends.”

A year ago, Tara Jones, an Amazon warehouse worker in Oklahoma, cradled her newborn, glanced over her pay stub on her phone and noticed that she had been underpaid by a significant chunk: $90 out of $540.

A year ago, Tara Jones, an Amazon warehouse worker in Oklahoma, cradled her newborn, glanced over her pay stub on her phone and noticed that she had been underpaid by a significant chunk: $90 out of $540. The mistake kept repeating even after she reported the issue. Jones, who had taken accounting classes at community college, grew so exasperated that she wrote an email to Jeff Bezos, the company’s founder. “I’m behind on bills, all because the pay team messed up,” she wrote weeks later. “I’m crying as I write this email.” Unbeknown to Jones, her message to Bezos set off an internal investigation, and a discovery: Jones was far from alone. For at least 1 1/2 years — including during periods of record profit — Amazon had been shortchanging new parents, patients dealing with medical crises and other vulnerable workers on leave, according to a confidential report on the findings. Some of the pay calculations at her facility had been wrong since it opened its doors over a year before. As many as 179 of the companies’ other warehouses had potentially been affected, too. Amazon is still identifying and repaying workers to this day, according to Kelly Nantel, a company spokesperson. That error is only one strand in a long-standing knot of problems with Amazon’s system for handling paid and unpaid leaves, according to dozens of interviews and hundreds of pages of internal documents obtained by The New York Times. Together, the records and interviews reveal that the issues have been more widespread — affecting the company’s blue-collar and white-collar workers — and more harmful than previously known, amounting to what several company insiders described as one of its gravest human resources problems. Workers across the country facing medical problems and other life crises have been fired when the attendance software mistakenly marked them as no-shows, according to former and current human resources staff members, some who would speak only anonymously for fear of retribution. Doctors’ notes vanished into black holes in Amazon’s databases. Employees struggled to even reach their case managers, wading through automated phone trees that routed their calls to overwhelmed back-office staff in Costa Rica, India and Las Vegas. And the whole leave system was run on a patchwork of programs that often did not speak to one another. Some workers who were ready to return found that the system was too backed up to process them, resulting in weeks or months of lost income. Higher-paid corporate employees, who had to navigate the same systems, found that arranging a routine leave could turn into a morass. In internal correspondence, company administrators warned of “inadequate service levels,” “deficient processes” and systems that are “prone to delay and error.” The extent of the problem puts in stark relief how Amazon’s workers routinely took a back seat to customers during the company’s meteoric rise to retail dominance. Amazon built cutting-edge package processing facilities to cater to shoppers’ appetite for fast delivery, far outpacing competitors. But the business did not devote enough resources and attention to how it served employees, according to many longtime workers. “A lot of times, because we’ve optimized for the customer experience, we’ve been focused on that,” Bethany Reyes, who was recently put in charge of fixing the leave system, said in an interview. She stressed that the company was working hard to rebalance those priorities. The company’s treatment of its huge workforce — now more than 1.3 million people and expanding rapidly — faces mounting scrutiny. Labor activists and some lawmakers say that the company does not adequately protect the safety of warehouse employees, and that it unfairly punishes internal critics. This year, workers in Alabama, upset about the company’s minute-by-minute monitoring of their productivity, organized a serious, although ultimately failed, unionization threat against the company. In June, a Times investigation detailed how badly the leave process jammed during the pandemic, finding that it was one of many employment lapses during the company’s greatest moment of financial success. Since then, Amazon has emphasized a pledge to become “Earth’s best employer.” Andy Jassy, who replaced Bezos as CEO in July, recently singled out the leave system as a place where it can demonstrate its commitment to improve. The process “didn’t work the way we wanted it to work,” he said at an event this month. In response to the more recent findings on the troubles in its leave program, Amazon elaborated on its efforts to fix the system’s “pain points” and “pay issues,” as Reyes put it in the interview. She called the erroneous terminations “the most dire issue that you could have.” The company is hiring hundreds of employees, streamlining and connecting systems, clarifying its communications and training human resources staff members to be more empathetic. But many issues persist, causing breakdowns that have proved devastating. This spring, a Tennessee warehouse worker abruptly stopped receiving disability payments, leaving his family struggling to pay for food, transportation or medical care. “Not a word that there had ever been a problem,” said James Watts, 54, who worked at Amazon in Chattanooga for six years before repeated heart attacks and strokes forced him to go on disability leave. The sudden loss of his benefits caused a cascade of calamities: Because he was without pay for two weeks, his car was repossessed. To afford food and doctors’ bills, Watts and his wife sold their wedding rings. “We’re losing everything,” he said. The benefits restarted without explanation several months later, but the couple are still struggling to regain their footing. Nantel said that Amazon regretted Watts’ situation, that the process was too confusing and that it was working to simplify the process of navigating leaves. As the country’s second largest private employer, Amazon offers a wide array of leaves — paid or unpaid, medical or personal, legally mandated or not. While Amazon used to outsource the management of its leave programs, it brought the effort in-house when providers could not keep up with its growth. It is now one of the largest leave administrators in the country. Employees apply for leaves online, on an internal app, or wade through automated phone trees. The technology that Amazon uses to manage leaves is a patchwork of software from a variety of companies — including Salesforce, Oracle and Kronos — that do not connect seamlessly. That complexity forces human resource employees to input many approved leaves, an effort that last fall alone required 67 full-time employees, an internal document shows. Reyes said a permanent bridge between the programs is scheduled to be completed in March, with incremental improvements in the meantime. Current and former employees involved in administering leaves say that the company’s answer has often been to push them so hard that some required leaves themselves. Last year, in an email sent out on a Friday about a Sunday deadline, a corporate manager of the leave system scolded his teams to do more. “You all know what needs to be accomplished and by when,” he wrote. “No exceptions!” Reyes said that employee burnout was a huge concern of hers as she was taking on her new role and that she was trying to address it in several ways. Amazon’s own teams have not always been well-versed in the system, internal documents show. An external assessment last fall found that the back-office staff members who talk with employees “do not understand” the process for taking leaves and regularly gave incorrect information to workers. In one audited call, which dragged on for 29 minutes, the phone agent told a worker that he was too new to be eligible for short-term disability leave, when in fact workers are eligible from their first day. Reyes said that with improved training, her teams could now resolve more than nine out of 10 issues on the first call. In some cases, Amazon has been accused of violating the law. In 2017, Leslie Tullis, who managed a subscription product for children, faced a mounting domestic violence crisis and requested an unpaid leave that employers must offer under Washington state law to protect victims. Once approved, Tullis would be allowed to work intermittently; she could be absent from work as much as necessary, and with little notice; and she would be protected against retaliation. Amazon granted the leave, but the company did not seem to understand what it had said yes to. It had no policy that corresponded to the law of the company’s home state, court documents show. Tullis said she spent as many as eight hours a week dealing with the company to manage her leave. At one point, she was moving regularly to keep her children safe. Despite the legal protections, her bosses would become visibly frustrated when she was behind on work, “like I was betraying them every day,” she said. In June 2019, after she took two days of leave to deal with the latest emergency in a continuing family crisis just before a performance plan was due, she was fired for missing the deadline by two days. The Washington state attorney general’s office took up her case, calling Amazon’s leave reporting system “a failure” and arguing that the company retaliated in violation of the state law. Amazon is fighting the case. Nantel said the company gave Tullis flexibility and support, as well as the equivalent of about seven months of unpaid leave over two years. She said Tullis was fired not in retaliation but because her performance faltered while she was not on leave. Just before she was dismissed, she emailed her manager, stunned that the deadline was not pushed back to accommodate the exact type of crisis the leave law was intended to protect. “Domestic violence is a series of emergencies,” Tullis wrote in an email, “and the victims don’t get to pick when it ends.”

Inside Amazon’s worst human resources problem

human-resources

Human Resources, News on Human Resources, stories on Human Resources, articles on Human Resources, Human Resources stories at Wion, Human Resources news, Human Resources latest news