Your Underperformer Is Costing You More Than His Paycheck
Your Underperformer Is Costing You More Than His Paycheck
You've got a guy. Eight months in. Not terrible — shows up most days, doesn't cause drama, probably tries. But the callbacks follow him. Jobs run long. Your best tech has started giving you a look when the schedule goes up and his name is next to hers on a two-man call. You've told yourself you'll deal with it next month. You've said this for six months.
The tab is already running.
The Math Nobody Runs
Most shop owners know what a bad hire costs in wages. They don't know what he costs in everything else. That's where you actually go broke.
Start with callbacks. A tech generating two callbacks a month on installs he should be closing clean — each one is a truck, a minimum hour of labor, usually parts, and a customer with a story. Not "they came back and fixed it." The story is "they had to come back." That's the three-star Google review. That's the neighbor who hears it at the hardware store.
When I was rebuilding Smith Mechanical after the crash — 2010, 2011, running lean on residential service — I had a tech during that stretch who wasn't malicious, wasn't obviously lazy. Two, sometimes three callbacks a month on water heater installs and service calls that should've been clean. I kept routing him to simpler work. Kept thinking he'd round a corner.
When I finally sat down and added it up — callbacks, lost follow-on jobs, the time I spent fixing his work or rolling a second truck — it was somewhere north of $14,000 over eight months. That number didn't include the customers who called someone else next time. Just the direct, trackable costs. I had been nursing my business back from the edge and paying $14,000 I didn't have for a problem I kept deferring.
Write that number down. Most owners who actually do it stop stalling.
Then count the management time. You're not managing this guy — you're routing around him. Giving him the thin-margin calls because you don't trust him with the complicated ones. That means your good tech is running harder, and you're underusing a truck on your payroll. Every week you run that dance, you're bleeding efficiency you'll never recover.
It Ain't Loyalty — It's Avoidance
Here's what shop owners tell themselves: I'm standing by my guy. Good help is hard to find. I invested in him.
That's avoiding a hard conversation and calling it a virtue.
I've said for years the "skilled trades shortage" narrative is about half lazy. There's no shortage of guys who want $32 an hour to ride along and look busy. There is a shortage of guys who'll show up on time and get better year over year. Keeping a weak hand because "good help is hard to find" is the same logic — a rationalization dressed as a business reality. It lets you off the hook.
The difference between a bad shop and a dead shop is cash, not skill. A shop full of mediocre techs can survive if the numbers hold. But a shop that tolerates underperformers long enough bleeds both — because your good techs stop carrying the weight for free. You don't slide to mediocre. You slide to two exhausted people doing the work of four.
That ain't loyalty. It's a slow leak with a name on it.
The Guy Who Leaves Because You Didn't Act
Nobody counts this one. They should, because it's usually the most expensive line on the invoice.
You've got a working foreman — the guy who runs a two or three-man crew and still gets his hands dirty. He knows your pricing and your customers. He catches problems before they become warranties. He's been carrying your underperformer for six months. He hasn't complained because he's not a complainer. But he's keeping score.
When he walks, you don't lose one employee. You lose the person who was running your informal QC without a title, who knew which customers needed a call before the invoice, who trained the new guys without being asked. I've watched it happen. Takes the better part of two seasons to get back to where you were. Meanwhile the guy who drove him out is still on the clock.
After 2008, I cut four men in one brutal stretch and kept three. Those three watched me make every call directly — no vague "business reasons," no buffer. I told them what was happening and why. They stayed through 2009, 2010, 2011, because they believed I ran a straight operation. Credibility with a crew isn't built on speeches. It's built on the decisions they watch you make when the decisions are hard.
If you're carrying a bad hire, your best guy already knows. The question is whether he thinks you know too.
The Pattern You've Seen Before
The Whitman Builders situation in 2011 — different problem, same loop. They were a builder account stretching my receivables from 30 days to 90, then past that. I kept telling myself next month. Kept working their jobs. When I finally stopped and filed the lien, I got out with most of what I was owed. If I'd waited another 60 days I might not have.
The underperformer runs the same loop. Next month. Let's see how the next job goes. Except the hole doesn't stay the same size while you're deciding.
The longer you wait, the bigger the hole. That's not a principle. It's arithmetic.
The Six-Month Window
Most owners cross from managing a performance problem to just absorbing one around month four. They don't notice until month nine.
Same owner who can't put a hard number on a job works on day rate because he doesn't trust his own estimate. He's usually the same owner who can't put a hard number on a bad hire. If you don't name the number, there's no deadline, and the decision stays hypothetical.
Two nights a month I teach code at the voc school out here. Twenty, twenty-five guys a session. Some entry level, some mid-career. Whether a guy will round the corner shows up clearly by month two. By month six it's settled. The only open question is whether you've said it out loud.
Most owners haven't. They've said something like "we need to see improvement" with no date and no definition. That's not a performance conversation. That's a suggestion with plausible deniability.
If you can't name the specific jobs, the specific callbacks, the specific dollar amount, and the specific date you said something — you've observed the problem. You haven't managed it. Those are different things.
What You Do Monday Morning
Not a framework. Just the order I'd run it.
Sit down this weekend and write the list. Every callback you can attribute. Dates, job addresses, your best estimate of the cost. Conversations you had and when. You need to see the full number in one place. It will be larger than you think, and that number is what ends the stalling.
Then have the conversation the same way you'd handle a change order with a homeowner. You explain what you found. You say what has to change. You give a date — specific, not vague. You don't start the next phase until things are clear. I've had this conversation a dozen times. It's always shorter than the owner expected. If you're giving someone a real final chance, write down what success looks like. "Three clean months, no callbacks on your jobs" is a sentence. "I need to see improvement" is a feeling.
Then go talk to your best guy. Not about the underperformer by name. Just look him in the eye and tell him you see who's carrying weight. Say it directly. That conversation costs nothing and buys you real goodwill with the person you actually can't afford to lose.
Then do what you said you were going to do.
The Questions I Get Asked
"I've already put six months into training him — doesn't cutting him loose make that a bigger loss?"
That money's gone either way. The question is what the next six months cost. If the last six produced $14,000 in damage and a foreman who's updating his resume, the next six don't get cheaper on their own.
"What if the problem is my fault — bad onboarding, no clear expectations?"
Honest question and most owners skip it. If you never defined what a clean install looks like or what the callback threshold is, some of this is on you. The real test: have you set clear expectations, given a fair runway, and documented the feedback — and still gotten the same results? If yes, it's them. If you've mostly observed and hoped, run it right for four weeks first. Specific expectations, weekly check-in, written notes. If nothing changes, you have your answer.
"How do I handle the crew when I let someone go?"
Keep it short. "It wasn't working out, we made a change." That's it. The crew will watch how you handle it more than what you say. The good techs will feel more settled, not less — because they know you're running a real operation and not just hoping problems age out.
"Is a formal PIP worth doing, or is it just theater?"
Most small-shop PIPs are a 30-day delay that makes the owner feel like he followed a process. If you're writing one mostly so you can say you tried, you already know what the outcome is. Skip it and have the real conversation sooner. The only time it's worth the paperwork is when you genuinely haven't been clear and you're giving the guy a documented shot with a real definition of success.
"What do I owe someone legally before I let them go?"
Call somebody who knows your state's rules before you do anything. Final paycheck timing, PTO payout, unemployment — it varies. One call to an employment attorney costs less than finding out after the fact.
"How do I keep this from happening on the next hire?"
Write down what you expect before the first day. Callback threshold, on-time standard, skills you expect by 90 days. Have them sign it. Then actually review it at 30, 60, and 90. Most small shops skip the reviews and act surprised at month seven. Set the standard on day one or you're managing on vibes. Period.
Enjoyed this article?
Get articles like this in your inbox every Monday. Free, no spam.