Archived how i was baffled today

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 17, 2016
Messages
351
i told the market guys they need to man up and put the milk away and to stop leaving it for other people. THEN i found myself in the office because i was derogatory and disrespectful to the PAs as they are leaders too! but i explained, milk that comes on monday isnt put away until tuesday morning before the FDC order comes in, and its a nice little shock when trying to put a pallet in the dairy room to find i need to put the milk away that was pushed the day before.
now here comes the strange part ...
the CTL says to me, that when she has both her PAs in her office like how i was, she said when their testosterone gets too and they have a dick measurings contest i end it by telling them that i have the biggest dick. SHE said SHE had the biggest dick. HER. i was so confused by what she was saying.

once the words digested i went to my ETL and they had said while me saying to man up wasnt anywhere near as bad as what i had said, and they needed to address this because she cant be speaking that way to team members.
 
You do understand that what she was saying wasn't literal right? She's not talking about the PAs whipping out their schlongs and taking a ruler to them and that she also unbuttons her pants only to reveal that she has an enormous member stashed away.

It sounds to me like she's saying that the PAs work against each other in a competitive manner and she's making it clear that she's in charge. She just put that into a more casually used phrase.

You can go to HR and maybe they'll talk to her but it will likely accomplish nothing and sour her relationship with you.
 
Corporate has such a different meaning of coaching than stores seem to understand. it is a means of discipline but it is supposed to be used as a measure of teaching the TM how to do their job the way they are expected, not just a disciplinary step.
 
wait so i got a coaching? i wasnt told that was a couching, nor did i sign off on anything.
 
You do understand that what she was saying wasn't literal right? She's not talking about the PAs whipping out their schlongs and taking a ruler to them and that she also unbuttons her pants only to reveal that she has an enormous member stashed away.

It sounds to me like she's saying that the PAs work against each other in a competitive manner and she's making it clear that she's in charge. She just put that into a more casually used phrase.

You can go to HR and maybe they'll talk to her but it will likely accomplish nothing and sour her relationship with you.

sour my relationship with her? please she has openly labelled m,e as a whiny little snitch. i really didnt want to be on her team. i was forced into the role on consumables TM because they had no one else and i tried my damnest to NOT be her TM. this same TL shared info with an injured TM on how to mix percesets with beer for a good buzz. she seems high all the time, and he baby/full house manner of speech irritates the hell out of me. BELIEVE ME, its not a role or TL i like to find myself in or working under but thats my fate it seems.
 
Coaching doesn't really exist anymore, and you wouldn't really know you got coached/counseled other than having a discussion with a lead. They're documented informally and don't require TMs to know about them.

If your CTL is talking about dick measuring contests, I would probably go to HR. PAs are also not leads in the slightest, they're just given more pull in market areas. Should you really talk to other TMs that way? Probably not, even if they deserve it. I might mention the way the CTL spoke to your ETL-HR, but I might just take the hit on being spoken to in how you spoke to the PAs.
 
so i can be couched and never know it? omg i wonder how many times ive been written down as being couched by a TL and never knew it?

im pretty over the leadership in my store im highly considering a transfer.
 
Coaching doesn't really exist anymore, and you wouldn't really know you got coached/counseled other than having a discussion with a lead. They're documented informally and don't require TMs to know about them.

If your CTL is talking about dick measuring contests, I would probably go to HR. PAs are also not leads in the slightest, they're just given more pull in market areas. Should you really talk to other TMs that way? Probably not, even if they deserve it. I might mention the way the CTL spoke to your ETL-HR, but I might just take the hit on being spoken to in how you spoke to the PAs.

Coachings are no longer documented, that's how it has been for a few months. Target has parted ways with relating the term coaching to disciplining. Coaching now quite literally means coaching, in that it's a means to talk something over with one who needs it to improve on a particular aspect of their job that they're having difficulty with. This is typically (and should be done) in a form of leaders asking you questions to probe out responses from you that help you strategize a solution.
 
They refer to it as 'counseling' now, not even sure coaching is in the vernacular.

When I counsel, it's more or less a conversation to understand what happened, why it happened, and how we avoid it in the future. It's an informal conversation and, (at least at my store), we document them informally with an e-mail to ETL-HR just letting them know a conversation occurred. Once enough counselings have occurred with no improvement, we move onto CCA.
 
They refer to it as 'counseling' now, not even sure coaching is in the vernacular.

When I counsel, it's more or less a conversation to understand what happened, why it happened, and how we avoid it in the future. It's an informal conversation and, (at least at my store), we document them informally with an e-mail to ETL-HR just letting them know a conversation occurred. Once enough counselings have occurred with no improvement, we move onto CCA.

I'm only speaking from the learning plan I had to do 3 months ago speaking on the issue. They did refer to it as coaching throughout the learning plan, though, so I don't believe the vernacular has changed.
 
I'm only speaking from the learning plan I had to do 3 months ago speaking on the issue. They did refer to it as coaching throughout the learning plan, though, so I don't believe the vernacular has changed.

Target loves to change things and not pass that information along to the TM.
Think of yourself as a mushroom and you will feel better.

They refer to it as 'counseling' now, not even sure coaching is in the vernacular.

When I counsel, it's more or less a conversation to understand what happened, why it happened, and how we avoid it in the future. It's an informal conversation and, (at least at my store), we document them informally with an e-mail to ETL-HR just letting them know a conversation occurred. Once enough counselings have occurred with no improvement, we move onto CCA.


So the emails with the 'counseling' go in the persons file?
And they stack up so people can see that the person has had enough counseling to the point that they will need a CCA?
Or do they stack up to the point that they magically become a CCA like coachings used to?
That was one of my sore points about coachings was that you could get a number of them without being told that was what was happening, then get called in to sign a CCA that consisted of a stack of those phantom coachings.
When you are told that you cut the cord on the irons too short (even though that was what you were taught to do in the first place) and you promise never to do it again but that winds up being stacked up in the coaching that become a CCA it's pretty clear they just want to get rid of you.
 
Yeah, I've no idea on that point. We had a long ass meeting and watched some corporate videos on the term 'counseling', that's the only term we use now. But more or less, the use of coaching/counseling is different or more 'brand'.

So the emails with the 'counseling' go in the persons file?
And they stack up so people can see that the person has had enough counseling to the point that they will need a CCA?
Or do they stack up to the point that they magically become a CCA like coachings used to?
That was one of my sore points about coachings was that you could get a number of them without being told that was what was happening, then get called in to sign a CCA that consisted of a stack of those phantom coachings.
When you are told that you cut the cord on the irons too short (even though that was what you were taught to do in the first place) and you promise never to do it again but that winds up being stacked up in the coaching that become a CCA it's pretty clear they just want to get rid of you.
It's pretty much the same route to CCA as it used to be, Target just wants us to focus on giving the TM the proper chance to improve based on these discussions. The intent is different, but you're right in that we can just use it the same way anyway...only difference is the informality of the coaching 'form'.

When I speak to someone, say, on accuracy, it's just a quick 5 minute aside on the importance of accuracy, what they might be doing wrong, and that we need to have a focus on fixing what's causing the errors. If I have more instances, it's similar conversations, but I might let them know if poor accuracy continues, it could lead to CCA. If it keeps happening anyway with the TM making no apparent attempt at improving even with these conversations, it's CCA.

I could theoretically be a dick and call them counselings if I just let the TM know they had 20+ baffles and hit them 3 weeks in a row then drop a CCA, but that's not the intent as I'm not actively working them up. I think that's the intent behind getting rid of 'coaching' in favor of 'counseling'.

Also, I think turnover is a metric now so they're probably worried about that too.
 
Target loves to change things and not pass that information along to the TM.
Think of yourself as a mushroom and you will feel better.




So the emails with the 'counseling' go in the persons file?
And they stack up so people can see that the person has had enough counseling to the point that they will need a CCA?
Or do they stack up to the point that they magically become a CCA like coachings used to?
That was one of my sore points about coachings was that you could get a number of them without being told that was what was happening, then get called in to sign a CCA that consisted of a stack of those phantom coachings.
When you are told that you cut the cord on the irons too short (even though that was what you were taught to do in the first place) and you promise never to do it again but that winds up being stacked up in the coaching that become a CCA it's pretty clear they just want to get rid of you.

Coaching, or "counseling" is not material that would go into any type of file. It is merely a means to try and support someone through a process they're struggling with, or a conflict they faced that they didn't resolve as efficiently as they could have. If it is included in a closing email or shift-change email to the leadership team, it could be thrown in to give a heads up to the leadership team so they're aware there was a struggle a TM faced and it was addressed. At that point, if such a struggle happens again, they know it is a repeat. It would probably result in another coaching, and eventually lead to a CCA if there's been no improvement.

Example: CTL has failed to come clean on C&S. STL coaches them on the matter (btw, did you know that your STL's were the ones that own the grocery process?) asking the CTL questions that makes them try to brainstorm where they went wrong and what they should have done to corrected the problem. CTL eventually learns that they should have walkied to an LOD that they needed support with their truck, or that there was efficiency issues with some TM's that weren't addressed. Again, the questions asked by the STL during the coaching are to probe the CTL to learn where they made their mistake and have the CTL brainstorm their own solution. So the STL would probably say "why do you think it's important to course correct a TM efficiency issue at the spot rather than address it later? or, what could you have done differently next time when you realize your workload will be too heavy for your current staffing level?" This would lead the CTL to saying "I should call for support from the LOD, or I should address my TM's efficiency when I notice room for improvement.


Hope that makes some sense!
 
It makes sense and I'm sure that in a perfect world that is how it should be used.
However as someone who was performanced out of my job I can tell you it's not used that way on many occasions.

Also I would say that keeping track of how many times you have talked to someone about a subject does make sense.
That way you avoid the frustration of other TMs watching a coworker do the same damn thing over and over without seeming to have any consequences just because nobody kept a paper trail.
Having been a manager I do understand the importance of keeping your ducks in a row.
However, making sure the TMs understand exactly what the status of the conversation is makes a big difference as well.
Making it seem like you are just having a casual conversation does you both a major disservice and in my experience some TLs are guilty of that.
 
It makes sense and I'm sure that in a perfect world that is how it should be used.

Making it seem like you are just having a casual conversation does you both a major disservice and in my experience some TLs are guilty of that.

Agreed, when these conversations happen there should be a certain tone that takes place to signal to the TM/TL that "this is a more serious conversation". And in a perfect world the coaching would probably start off with the leader approaching said TM/TL stating "I've noticed you've been having difficulty finishing your workload on time". That way, that tone is set and the TM/TL knows there's improvements to be made and they can speak to it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top