Maya Torres Executive mandate People Leadership Seat · USD 4,800 / month
90-day CHRO mandate: Calderon Foods
Maya Torres builds the people function. The live grievance is carved out of this mandate entirely.
Calderon has 310 staff, an HR administrator, and no one who has ever designed how people are paid, promoted or managed. It also has a live grievance that reached the MD in November. This mandate builds the first and stays out of the second, and the carve-out at clause 3 is not a formality.
From 11 January, Maya owns the people function, policy design, the pay framework and recruitment process, with spend to USD 20,000. The grievance raised on 14 November is excluded from this mandate in full. Maya will not advise on it, sit in on it, or see the file, and the company's employment lawyer continues to run it.
Document control
- Document number
- MAN-CAL-01
- Version
- 1.2
- Effective
- 11 January 2027
- Owner
- Maya Torres, Fractional CHRO
- Approved by
- Elena Calderon, Managing Director
- Next review
- 12 April 2027
- Classification
- Confidential. Executive only
Why
What the diagnostic found
| Observed | Evidence |
|---|---|
| No pay framework | Confirmed. Pay is set individually at hire and adjusted on request |
| Nine managers, none trained | None has had management training. Six are technically excellent and were promoted for it |
| Turnover concentrated in months 4 to 9 | 27 of 41 leavers in 18 months left between month 4 and month 9 |
| No exit interviews | None recorded. The month 4 to 9 pattern has never been investigated |
| Policies exist and nobody can find them | Six policies, three locations, two of them contradict |
| The HR administrator is good and overloaded | One person, 310 staff, entirely transactional |
The month 4 to 9 pattern is the most interesting number here. People who leave in the first three months were mis-hired; people who leave after a year usually leave for something. A cluster at four to nine months normally points at onboarding or at a manager, and nobody has looked.
Authority
Decision rights
| Maya decides | MD decides | Lawyer advises | |
|---|---|---|---|
| People function structure and priorities | Yes | ||
| Recruitment and onboarding process | Yes | ||
| Policy design and drafting | Yes, drafts | Approves | Reviews before issue |
| Manager training programme | Yes | ||
| Exit interview process and reporting | Yes | ||
| Spend to USD 20,000 | Yes | ||
| Pay framework design | Yes, proposes | Approves | |
| Any individual's pay | MD | ||
| Any dismissal or disciplinary outcome | MD | Yes | |
| Any grievance | See clause 3 | MD | Yes |
| Redundancy, in any number | MD and board | Yes |
Carve-out
The matter this mandate does not touch
| Why | Detail |
|---|---|
| Maya is not an employment lawyer | A grievance in progress needs legal advice, not people advice, and the company already has both a lawyer and a process |
| A fractional adviser inside a live grievance is a risk to the employee | The person who raised it did not consent to an external adviser seeing their file, and they should not have to |
| It would compromise the wider work | Policy design done by someone with a live matter in their head is policy design aimed at one case |
| Clean lines are easier than careful ones | A rule that says never is easier to keep than a rule that says only where appropriate |
Plan
What the 90 days does
-
Exit interviews start, and the back catalogue is asked
Every leaver from here, plus a voluntary conversation offered to the last 20. The month 4 to 9 question gets an answer.
-
Policies consolidated to one place
Six policies, one location, contradictions resolved. Lawyer reviews before reissue.
-
Pay framework designed
Bands, a review cycle and a rule for out-of-cycle requests. Proposed to the MD, not implemented.
-
Manager training, all nine
Six half days. The single highest value item in this mandate and the slowest to show a result.
-
Onboarding redesigned
Informed by what the exit interviews found, not by best practice.
-
Review
Framework proposed, managers trained, a reason for the month 4 to 9 pattern.
Measures
How this gets judged on 12 April
| Measure | Today | What good looks like |
|---|---|---|
| Exit interviews | None | Every leaver, reported quarterly |
| A reason for the month 4 to 9 cluster | Unknown | Evidenced, and acted on |
| Pay framework | None | Designed, proposed, MD decides |
| Managers trained | 0 of 9 | 9 of 9 |
| Policies findable and consistent | 6 policies, 3 places, 2 conflicts | One place, no conflicts, lawyer reviewed |
| Turnover | 41 in 18 months | Reported. Not a 90 day measure |
Turnover is reported and is not a target. Ninety days is not long enough to move it, and a people mandate judged on turnover in one quarter creates pressure to keep people who should leave.
Document control
Revision history
| Version | Date | Author | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.2 | 6 January 2027 | Maya Torres | Clause 3 extended to cover any new matter arising during the mandate, not only the November grievance. |
| 1.1 | 2 January 2027 | Maya Torres | Lawyer review added as a condition on policy reissue after the company's solicitor commented on the draft. |
| 1.0 | 19 December 2026 | Maya Torres | Agreed and signed. Effective 11 January 2027. |
| 0.1 | 12 December 2026 | Maya Torres | First draft from the people diagnostic of 8 December. |