In order to properly answer the question, I would like to see the actual wording of the rule. How is "safety violation" defined. Does it take into account that certain violations are more serious than others (in fact, there are some that might result in an immediate termination or suspension). However, if all it says is what you posted, I would suggest that it be changed. AS I stated earlier there are degrees of safety violations. Going to different extremes of seriousness, I would never want to terminated an employee whose ear plug fell out and I would never allow anyone who operated a fork life while drunk to go unpunished (suspended or terminated)on the first offense.
Our progressive discipline system (Union but matters not) involves three steps, the third resulting in termination. Safety violations are treated no differently from other infractions and may well be one of the three steps. A violation is a violation is a violation.
Comments
Is leaving a waste can in the middle of an aisle the same in terms of a "strike" as drivng a company car while intoxicated? Give some examples.
And are all incidents treated the same until the third one. In other words, any progressive discipline?
Paul