I transferred from Customer Support to Operations three weeks ago.
New department. New supervisor. Different responsibilities.
My Vfficient profile shows the correct manager:
David Wilson — Operations
So why is my former supervisor, Sarah, still receiving notifications about me?
She even mentioned a request I submitted last Thursday.
A request that had absolutely nothing to do with her department.
I asked HR whether something was wrong.
They checked my profile and said:
“Your manager is David. Everything looks correct.”
Well, clearly not everything.
Changing the Manager’s Name Isn’t the Entire Transfer
My transfer became effective September 1.
The company updated my position and reporting relationship. David now appears as my supervisor.
But Sarah apparently still has some connection to my employee record.
That could come from an old organizational assignment, a workflow, a delegated responsibility, or a permission that wasn’t reviewed during the transfer.
The exact cause depends on how the employer configured its systems.
What matters is that the company needs to identify why Sarah can still see or receive information about me instead of pointing at the manager field and declaring the issue solved.
Sarah Doesn’t Need to Be Snooping
Here’s an important detail: Sarah didn’t necessarily do anything wrong.
She may have opened a notification sent directly to her.
She may have found me in a team view that still includes former direct reports.
Or she may be an authorized approver for a separate process that HR forgot to reconsider after the transfer.
Those situations are different from someone deliberately searching for information they shouldn’t see.
Before accusing anybody, find out how the information reached them.
But don’t dismiss the concern just because Sarah is a manager.
Being a manager doesn’t mean every employee’s information is automatically your business.
The Transfer Was Effective September 1. Why Is the Old Assignment Still There?
HR discovers that my current manager was updated, but an older departmental assignment still appears in another part of the workforce setup.
Now the contradiction makes sense.
One part of the record says:
Operations — David Wilson
Another still associates me with:
Customer Support — Sarah Miller
Depending on the employer’s configuration, that stale assignment may affect a team view, notification, or approval route.
This is why an internal transfer needs an effective date and a consistent organizational record.
If the change happened September 1, current assignments shouldn’t casually keep treating me as a member of the old team three weeks later.
Historical information is one thing. An active assignment is another.
Don’t Delete the History
Someone suggests removing Sarah’s name from every old record.
That’s not the answer either.
Sarah really was my supervisor before September 1.
Historical records should still be able to show that.
If she approved a request in August, the company shouldn’t rewrite the record to make it look as though David approved it.
The company needs accurate history and accurate current permissions.
Those are not competing goals.
A Pending Request Can Explain One Notification
Suppose I submitted a PTO request on August 28, when Sarah was still my supervisor.
The request remained pending after my September 1 transfer.
Sarah might still be connected to that particular transaction, depending on the approval workflow.
That would explain a notification about the August request.
It would not automatically explain why she can see a brand-new request I submitted in Operations on September 18.
That’s the distinction HR needs to investigate.
An old transaction may retain its original history or routing.
A new transaction should be evaluated against the appropriate current setup.
The Old Manager’s Access May Be Broader Than One Request
Now Sarah says:
“I can still see you in my team list.”
That’s more concerning than a single notification from an old request.
HR needs to determine what the view actually exposes.
Can she see only my name?
My department?
My schedule?
Time-off information?
Other employment details?
There’s a substantial difference between seeing a former employee in historical reporting and retaining current supervisory visibility into that person’s records.
Don’t lump every kind of visibility together.
And Don’t Fix It by Removing Every Permission Sarah Has
Sarah still manages twelve employees in Customer Support.
She needs the permissions required for that job.
Removing her entire managerial role to make my name disappear would be a ridiculous fix.
The company should correct the specific assignment, workflow, delegation, or permission responsible for the unintended visibility.
A precise problem deserves a precise correction.
Otherwise one employee’s transfer can break a manager’s legitimate work for an entire department.
What About the New Manager?
Here’s the other half of the mess.
David is supposed to manage me now.
But when I submit a new request, he says:
“I don’t see it.”
Sarah sees it.
David doesn’t.
So the company has managed to create the worst possible arrangement: the former supervisor receives the work, and the current supervisor can’t act on it.
This isn’t just a privacy concern anymore.
It’s an operational problem.
Requests can sit unresolved because everybody assumes the correct person has them.
Check the New Request, Not Just the Profile
HR finally opens the actual request I submitted after the transfer.
It was created September 18.
My new manager had already been effective for seventeen days.
Yet the request was routed according to an outdated relationship.
Now HR has something concrete to fix.
Not a vague complaint that “the portal is weird.”
A specific post-transfer transaction went to the wrong person.
That tells the company where to start looking.
Where Vfficient Fits
Vfficient can hold employee and organizational information and support HR-related workflows, depending on the employer’s setup.
But the manager displayed on my profile is only one piece of the picture.
The employer may also have separate assignments, approval configurations, delegated responsibilities, and connected systems.
If the information is correct in Vfficient but an external application is still using an old organizational relationship, that external setup may need correction too.
Don’t keep editing the same manager field hoping it will magically repair every system connected to it.
Three Weeks Is Long Enough
I understand a transfer can involve several administrative changes.
What I don’t understand is being told everything is correct when the wrong manager is still receiving my information.
The company should establish whether Sarah’s visibility is legitimate historical access, an unresolved old workflow, or an outdated current permission.
Then correct what is actually wrong.
David should receive the requests he’s responsible for.
Sarah should retain whatever access she legitimately needs for her own role.
And my employment record should accurately reflect the department I joined on September 1.
A transfer isn’t finished just because the right manager’s name appears on the screen. It’s finished when the underlying assignments and workflows reflect the change too.