Punish???

Whatever

Company has a strict non-solicitation policy. A few months ago, a manager was told that he could not sell things to raise money for charity. Today, he brought in stuffed animals to be sold to raise money for a charity. Obviously, this is a mistake. To make matters worse, he turned to an underling and told him to sell them. That ee immediately complained. Question--what do we do with the manager (the debate here is not over whether or not to give another warning but whether or not to suspend and if so, for how long.)

Rockie

Mistake? I think not. He knew of the policy and tried to get another employee to do it for him. He obviously knew this was wrong.

My first inclination (probably rash) would be to fire him, but definitely would suspend (a week if he is exempt).

It never ceases to amaze me how employees continue to shoot themselves in the foot!

ray a

Was it documented a few months ago? If not, I would lean toward a written warning at this stage. Being a manager, he is probably exempt, therefore the suspension should be paid, I presume (those more learned in exemption law may correct me). If you must pay him, then how much punishment is it really? The company is being punished by paying him and not having him work. At the management level, we would give him the written warning and next time terminate - and tell him that.

LeeR

I see two things here. Number one he knew the policy and decided to violate it. Number Two he used his position as a Supervisor to try and make an employee also break the policy.

Dutch2

I suggest a minimum of a written counseling that is placed in his file with the consequences on the form of what will happen to his employment next time this should happen. Are you sure no one else has engaged in this same activity? Not only did he violate a company policy but with his rank he attempted to force someone else to also do so.
No solicitation means just that. No girl scout cookies, boy scout popcorn, church cookbooks, etc...
We do not allow employees to go around the buildings pushing items for sale,but we do allow them to mention their cause in our weekly newsletter and to set up a sample of their product(s) in the break areas. So far this has worked pretty well for us. We occasionally get the much dreaded "everybody" email where someone is pushing an item for their church, charity or such. But we always remind them to remove their message and place their message in the newsletter.
Good Luck
Dutch2

HS

I hate to say it, but I would fire him. You say you have a "strict" non-solicitation policy, he was warned before and now he's trying to get a subordinate to do it for him. Have you had this scenario before? What did yo do then? If you haven't had this before, he needs to be the example you set forth for all others.

Crout

> Question--what do we
>do with the manager (the debate here is not over
>whether or not to give another warning but
>whether or not to suspend and if so, for how
>long.)

Huh? Are you guys running a pirate ship? Did he actually violate the policy a few months ago, or was he informed that the policy existed a few months ago? If it's the latter I would issue a Written Warning since the minimum length of his suspension would be one week, and that seems pretty severe for a couple of stuffed animals. However, if he did previously violate the policy, and he was disciplined, and you have documentation then go ahead and suspend him. I would also have him apologize to his employee.

Whatever

It is amazing how fast things happen. Manager has been terminated. First, the previous warning had been in writing and he had signed that he received it. However, we (includes Company President) were still inclined to just suspend him. However, manager decided to beat us to the punch. He went to the Co. President to complain about an underling who was insubordinate (wouldn't follow orders) and was being protected by HR. It was just a little too much for Pres. and manager was fired for violation of non-solicitation policy.

sonny

don't tell me the underlings insubordination was not selling his stuff ?

Don D

I'm surprised, Whatever! The politically correct terms for underling and punish are 'direct reports' and 'discipline'. And I'm also trying to figure out why Ray thinks that because he is exempt, the suspension should be paid. Otherwise, not knowing your culture there or the 'consequence of error' for the crime he committed, I can't comment on what ought to be done. I guarantee you if you fire him, he will come up with a list as long as his arm of people who have been selling girl scout cookies, church box lunch tickets, superbowl squares, on and on.

deniseE

WHOA! I'm still trying to recover from the idea that the now fired manager was complaining that his staff wouldn't violate company policy to sell his stuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ray a

OK, I looked it up this time. If an exempt is suspended w/o pay for a period of less than a week, they may lose their exempt status. So, they may be suspended for one week w/o pay. Did I get that right, Don?

Whatever

My nightmare was going to the union and having to say "We have this insubordinate ee who refused to break a company rule. However, even though we know the manager is trying to protect his derriere (we do know politically correct terms), we are going to stand by him." I really hate giving the union a good laugh. In any case, thank you for correcting my English.

System

So the guy basically fired himself. Wouldn't it be great if they all were this easy?

James Sokolowski
HRhero.com

Don D

yes, Ray.

Carey

Even though it's now all said and done - we only suspend for investigations, not to punish. So my answer to the question would have been no to the suspension.

Whatever

Out of curiosity, what do you do if the results of the investigation show a serious rule has been broken?

LFernandes

document, document, document then pray that it doesn't happen again on your watch!