Problem Emp Personnel File Issue

Melanie

I have a "problem" employee. She recently had to have a meeting with her supervisor, another employee, and their supervisor.

This employee felt the need to summarize the meeting and then wrote me a letter asking me to put her version of the summary of the meeting in her personnel file. Both supervisors present at the meeting state that her version of the meeting is completely incorrect. Her version is very derogatory of the other employee present, and she writes statements that she claims the other employee made that were of a harassing nature, and yet both supervisors present say this is not true. The employee writes in her letter that she does not want to discuss the matter further she just wants the letter placed in her personnel file.

Our policy on personnel files read that employees are welcome to attach statements of explanation to anything in their personnel file.

It doesn't address if they can have anything else placed in their file or not. What is anyone else's thought on this issue?

Parabeagle

Our policy states basically the same thing as yours. I have only had employees submit rebuttals to written warnings in the past. However, in your case I think I would tell the employee that while you appreciate her desire to have her version of the facts "on the record," it is probably more advisable that she keep her notes herself since her personnel file is only a record of her employment with the company and should only contain documents pertinent to her employment. Her "meeting minutes" are not pertinent nor relevant to her employment history and since her version includes derogatory conduct that you cannot substantiate, for her own protection they should not be in her file.

Don D

Based only on what you have said, and knowing nothing of the content of the meeting, I would ask the attending supervisor to put in writing her version of exactly what went on in the meeting, verbatim if possible, but contemporaneous at least. I would place or attach this memo to the one the employee wrote and would include it in HER file, the file of the supervisor and anyone else who was in that meeting if discipline resulted or may result. Documentation serves only one purpose and that is if it is needed at a later point in time to support or refute something.

Pork

"Dandy Don" is so very right! The previous poster is also very right that the individual should understand the memo she has written differs from the information witnessed by at least two other persons and could at a later date serve to discredit her ability to ascertain what is the truth and what is fact. For that reason Dandy Don's suggestion to attach it to other written memos of the meeting would be very useful in future defenses of negative actions toward the concerned ee. I personally would not ask the problem ee; I would task the other parties to write out their summations and include all summations in a seperate investigative file, but not in the employees personnel file.

I have been away to year end close out and unable to be here often. The Christmas Ham was wonderful but the DEER SLAYING was not productive at all. Happy New Year everyone, see ya'll on the HRhero links.

PORK

Parabeagle

I agree with both Don and Pork's posts, but I strenuously suggest that regardless of how many people write down their versions of what happened, NONE of them be placed in ANYONE'S personnel file. They have no business there. A separate, investigative file as Pork suggests is the most suitable alternative. Good luck.

TN HR

I strongly side with Beagle. While I appreciate Don and Pork's point of view, I'd have to say that I would want to nip this in the bud and not fight fire with fire. Next thing you know, you'll be filing a rebuttal to the rebuttal of the refutal memo on the meeting minutes.....You get the picture.

You are the HR department, not the central repository for archives of argumentative, convulted stories.

Happy new year everyone! Not much going on here in the Music City, except our Bowl game this afternoon where Auburn pounded, ahhheeem, some school from the mid-west

Gene

Pork

"GONG"! IN 2004, I PROMISE NEVER TO HIT THE CHECK MARK AFTER WRITING MY POST. Gene, "nipping this bud right now is exactly what we are doing", getting a clear record of the happening is "Nipping the bud", filing it is then the process of closing the door, until the pest comes a knocking again at a later date! I am not going to argue with the concerned EE, I am going to get all the facts and be ready to put out the fire with the facts. You write it but you don't provide an explanation to this young HRheromite in order to possibly get her next course of action right! I'm out of here for the deer field, good night!

PORK

marc

The separate investigative file is a good suggestion, but I am curious about the comments made that were of a harassing nature. Even though the EE said she does not want to discuss it further, it seems important that you not ignore the harassment.

This gives you the opening to really investigate. I think you may even have a duty to look into it a bit to determine if more needs to be done. Fortunately, you have two witnesses (supervisors) to the meeting. I think it is imperative that you get those versions in writing as suggested by Don and Pork and Parabeagle.

The EE cannot come back at you later with the assertion that a harassment claim was made and the company buried it.

Hatchetman

I also take the position that meeting notes are not part of the official personnel file but should be kept separate in an investigative file or sueprivosry file. The employee is then free to subimt her account for the "record" to that file or to the various participants which they can keep in their separate files.

In the end the various versions don't matter unless an action is taken on that meeting and the emplyee challneges it. Then it will become an issue of credibility of witnesses and preponderance of evidence of what was said. The documented versions and responses to them will of course be valuable to all parties as well as any decision maker having to decide on the cliam of th eemplyee about the action being based on information "phonied up" in the supervisors's documents.