Progressive discipline question
bgrimes
45 Posts
We try to use a progressive discipline procedure. A 'verbal', a '1st written', a '2nd written'and a 'final warning'. If a supervisor issues a 'verbal' and tells the employee the next action will be 'termination', is this allowed? I know you can 'skip' steps, but going from a 'verbal' to 'termination' worries me. The supervisor has had some past behavior and production problems with this employee, notes are in the employee's file, but they weren't 'formal' discipline forms. Please advise.
Comments
[email]paulknoch@hotmail.com[/email]
There is no union here. The employees are not provided with handbooks and policies either. Being in Human Resources here is a hard row to hoe. Supervisors and managers act and then tell what they've done. I don't claim to have all the answers, but 'jumping to termination' after a 'verbal warning' scares me. This is Missouri, an 'at-will' state. However, I know 'at-will' does not protect you in a lot of areas. We really do strive to be fair. But it seems that many managers, working without guidelines, make their own policies. Our owner will not issue handbooks or written guidelines. Everyone is on a different page.
The employee is scheduled to have another evaluation on July 24th.
What does your progressive discipline policy, plan or practice call for or allow?
If the employee is disciplined and told that on next occasion discharge will result, the employee has been technically put on notice that discharge will take place if there is repetition. However, of course, like many issues in human relations, there are always extenuating or aggravating circumstances. So, if 15 years pass between incidents, I don't think you would want to say,"well, you're fired because 15 years ago we warned you that if you did this again, you'd be fired, so you are!" When is "next time, you're fired" no longer really enforceable? That's the $64,000 question for you old timers (and really old timers, the $64 question).
I don't think it is wise for the supervisor to try to motivate the employee in that exact manner, by intentionally misrepresenting what could happen next time. If the supervisor wants to raise the spectre of discharge but doesn't expect it to occur, then he or she should say, "if you repeat this type of conduct again, you will be subject to more severe disciplinary action which could include written first or second warning or discharge." It's better than limiting the next discipline as discharge when the supervisor most likely won't take it.
If you have a good group of supervisors who are well trained in the mechanics of progressive discipline and how to administer it, it can work pretty well. But. it can also be disasterous if not followed properly. In my experience in this area, supervisors (1) do not like to administer discipline and (2) many tend to play favorites with people - let the ones they like slide and come down hard on the ones they would rather "go away". You can also get yourself in the position where you may have to terminate someone who is primarily a good employee, but because of circumstances of the progressive discipline policy, you may have to terminate.
As you can probably tell, I am not a great fan of progressive discipline!
>
Our written policy states that "The Company will not utilize a previous notice of counseling or warning if the employee does not receive any additional notices of warning during the subsequent 12-month period." We had to word it that way on purpose, so it would sail through during contract negotiations. The union thought it meant after the form was a year old, it was out the window. But, read carefully. It actually says they can all be used, forever, as long as there is subsequent documentation in the file at least once each 364 days. Its wise to have a written progressive discipline policy and procedure and follow it to the letter to keep the precedent-setting wolf at bay and to keep down challenges. Tell your boss (if you can) that it's not at all wise to NOT have ee handbooks. That is a clear positive check mark in the ee's column in a hearing or other action if he can say, "Well, no sir, they never gave us a handbook and I didn't really understand that was the policy." Old school company owners, and even some new-school ones, tend to think that if "we don't have it in writing, we can pretty much do what we want to." Invite him to attend a few of your Unemployment hearings.