Bitter direct report
Need some advice, but also just need to vent to people who might understand this situation.
I’m in a senior leadership role at a mid-sized organization in the Midwest and report directly to the CEO. Like a lot of organizations, we’ve had financial challenges since COVID. There’s a longer-term plan to get back to sustainable operations by 2030, but the current fiscal year is expected to be particularly rough because of several major planned expenses.
None of this is a secret internally. Staff know where things stand financially.
I’m running into an issue with one of the managers who reports to me. He’s pushing pretty hard for raises for his entire team, and one of his employees is now threatening to leave if compensation doesn’t change.
I’ve brought the situation up the chain. The answer from the CEO/CFO is basically: we understand the frustration, but we’re not adding recurring expenses right now. Get through this fiscal year and reassess.
I’ve seen enough of the financials that I understand the reasoning. I don’t necessarily agree with every decision being made, and I suspect leadership is being more conservative than absolutely necessary, but I also don’t think the financial concerns are manufactured.
The problem is that this manager simply doesn’t accept the answer. Every time I explain the situation, it turns into another argument about why his department should be the exception. He frequently points to his 7+ years with the organization and the fact that some members of his team have been here 10+ years.
I respect that kind of longevity, but I also struggle with the argument that tenure by itself creates an obligation for an organization to increase compensation, particularly when the organization is openly dealing with financial constraints. Maybe that’s where I’m out of touch.
He’s also younger and has very strong opinions about compensation, employers, wealth inequality, etc. He’s brought up the “1%” and similar topics in conversations where I wasn’t expecting it. I don’t really care about his politics or personal views, but I do think they influence how he interprets organizational decisions around money.
The frustrating part is that I genuinely like and respect this guy. He’s a good employee. But I’m increasingly becoming the person he directs his frustration toward because I’m the one delivering the answer from senior leadership.
And that’s where I’m stuck.
Do I completely agree with the CEO/CFO? No. I think they’re probably being more conservative than necessary. But I understand their reasoning, I’ve seen the numbers, and realistically I’m not going to repeatedly challenge the CEO over raises that they’ve already said aren’t happening this fiscal year.
At some point, isn’t the answer just the answer?
For those managing managers or working in senior leadership: how do you handle this when you’ve advocated for someone, received a definitive answer from above, and the manager below you refuses to accept it?
Do you keep explaining the reasoning? Eventually tell them the discussion is closed? Let them vent and just keep repeating the same answer?