Forums
Performance Reviews
General Forum
Performance Reviews
Discuss workforce management, performance management, retention, communication, motivation, contributing to business results and other topics.
Has anyone heard of giving the initial performance review based upon # of hours worked vs. # of months? We currently have FT and PT employees and give the initial performance review at 90 days. The ow
0
Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId53
Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId53Discussion:DiscussionId15868
1
|
Performance Reviews
posted at 8/9/1999 7:03 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 12
First: 6/15/1999
Last: 9/21/1999
|
Has anyone heard of giving the initial performance review based upon # of hours worked vs. # of months? We currently have FT and PT employees and give the initial performance review at 90 days. The owner now wants to go with # of hours worked because he thinks it's not "apples to apples" between FT and PT as far as an equal amount of time for which to be appraised. I have never heard of this - does anyone else do reviews this way? How does it work?
|
2
|
Performance Reviews
posted at 8/9/1999 8:17 PM EDT
|
|
Posts: 7
First: 8/9/1999
Last: 7/10/2001
|
Our policy for performance evals is "following six months of employment" - regardless of whether the employee is full or part time.
Leanne Sander
Palmerton Hospital
Palmerton, PA
|
3
|
Performance Reviews
posted at 8/9/1999 10:22 PM EDT
|
|
Posts: 90
First: 6/23/1999
Last: 9/26/2001
|
We have done that in one of my previous positions for part time staff and set it at hours comparable to where they would be if they had in fact worked full time. We had it all spelled out in the policy on evaluations. It could get cumbersome however tracking the hours worked if you have large numbers of part time staff. We did not so it was not an issue.
|
Stay Connected
Join our community for unlimited access to the latest tips, news and information in the HR world.