Good grief! Counseled by HIS manager? Does not care for her? Did not want her in the position? Protests his innocence (even though witnesses validated her complaint)???
This guy was spoken to by the same manager who knew about the complaint and did nothing. Are you serious? The supervisor had the audacity to harass her where there were witnesses. Come on, give me a break. You must deal with the supervisor swiftly and sternly. I don't care that he was too dumb to know better. Nobody else will care either. Move him to another area. Please, please, do not tell me about causing disruption and chaos. Handle it just like you do with turnover.
Now for the real biggie.... that so called manager is worthless. He may not have thought the complaint was a concern, but it was significant enough to her to make an issue of it. This guy needs more than a few classes on harassment and behaviour. I wonder what other problems he has ignored and turned an unsympathetic ear to? I'm sure time will tell if you just sit there and hold your breath.
I am glad I was able to loosen things up. Easy consensus is boring.
Sounds like I am the only one, 'cept perhaps Hatchetman, who has dealt with situations of real harassment that required a meaningful response, but were isolated, mild and inadvertent enough to not require decapitation (I was going to cite a different medical procedure, but perhaps it is outside the bounds of forum decorum).
Shadowfax is right as to the standard (judgment of strangers two years away, etc.), but I still don't know enough about the facts to be convinced that this could (much less, would) slice against the company. Even out here on the left coast, cases don't get to the jury with isolated and relatively trivial acts of harassment. I think. But maybe I don't see them. Love to see what the rest of you see is getting to trial.
Fundamentally, all I am saying, folks, is that information should precede judgment.
Regards,
Steve Mac
Steve McElfresh, PhD Principal & Founder HR Futures 408.605.1870
Steve, I would agree with you. In this situation, I don't have enough information regarding the supervisors specific acts to make a decision regarding disciplinary action or where to go with it. As I can recall, my company has been sued three times and all were for very egregious conduct that included physical contact and we settled those cases. When a member of management has been the harasser and investigation validated the allegations of a subordinate, the minimum action would be a final warning and transfer. I recognize this is easier for us to accomplish because we have a number of stores where we can flip-flop managers. I can't recall keeping a direct reporting relationship except in cases that the allegation was not validated or there was equal participation, perhaps. Even then, the manager is held to the higher standard to enforce our policies and not be part of the problem. Anyway, each situation has to be looked at case-by-case and the immediate and appropriate action determined based on the facts in that case.
We do not get the benefit of a full jury presentation, and it is probably a bit of a stretch to think the only you and Hatchetman have dealt with "...situations of real harassment that required a meaningful response, but were isolated, mild and inadvertent enough to not require decapitation..." That being said, I see enough red flags with the information given to warrant the responses posted. As an example, Georgia Peach feels the ee is exaggerating even though she knows she has problems. In addition, there is the allegation of a conspiracy with a Doctor related to being off work for stress, and the manager overlooking and downplaying the entire situation. This all requires decisive action by the company, if for no other reason than to counter the actions of the ee if it all is a big game. If the company loses, they write a big check.
Marc, I don't think that was what I said. I haven't a clue why my responses seem to offend you, but I can only respond based upon my experience which happens to be working in a larger corporate environment. I frankly, sometimes wish that wasn't the case, but it is.
I agree with Marc. I've worked in both big and small employers and have dealt with "real situations" from workplace violence to sexual harassment. We aren't provided with whole story in the original post but based on the facts presented to the Forum, I think there are enough red flags for those of us who have been through it, even minor cases of harassment, to warrant our responses.
The problem is that the company seems to have taken the attitude that the harassment was trivial. If you have ever been on the receiving end of harassment a touch, a salacious comment,etc is not a trivial manner, it is demeaning.
In the beginning of this thread the issue involved a female employee filing a grievance against a male supervisor alleging sexual harassment, in which the company's take on the grievance was that it does not think, “the supervisor was intending to sexually harass her - he was just too dumb to know how to behave properly." Witnesses corroborated the female employee story & the supervisor's manager counseled the supervisor - :-? strange to have the manager counsel the supervisor, as it took a grievance filing before the manager took any action on the issue – “the manager directly knew about her complaints and failed to take ANY action.” Then it appears that this same female employee is on some kind of "transition employment plan"(which means worker comp?) & your company wants her to go back to work for the supervisor - even though the counseling from the manager worked so well, x:o the supervisor continues to "protest his innocence", "doesn't care for her" and is "scared to have her back." Your company even goes further to state to the female employee (now called the 'complainant' in your post) that she's going to have to go back to work for this supervisor because "her supervisor will not be changed because of this one complaint."
Fast forward to your update. In addition to the above the company is also having problems with the female employee in that she doesn't want to be a housekeeper (transitional job), but instead wants to "go back to a "security" position" - and the company's problem? The company doesn't BELIEVE the employee when she says that she's divorced from her ex - the company KNOWS she's living with her ex & THE COMPANY FEELS MANIPULATED x:'( because they feel the employee is lying just so she can go back to the security position. Lastly, I hope xpray, we find out the company believes that this female employee, "...may also be in cohoots with a local doctor who is telling us she cannot physically do her housekeeping job at this time." And, even when presented with "detailed medical certification from her doctor" YOUR company /:) isn't sure it can trust the doctor.
I believe that employee’s work/abuse the system to their own benefit - but in this case - I completely suspect your company of potential retaliation and most definitely mismanagement. However, I am not a lawyer and I agree with another poster - this issue is bigger than the forum - and you should contact your attorney immediately for advice. This issue, to me, illustrates the need for smart, dynamic HR people in management positions that can affect change in a company and it’s culture – and the mess that’s created when HR isn’t.
Steve - I don't need near the level of info to cut a wayward super off at the knees as I do to defend the co. in court. All I need to know to know I have a problem, I know from Georgia P's first post:innappropriate coments; yup, take more than one to a hostile environment make. Innappropriate touching? You're out! End of line! NO free passes! Add to this the employer believes her, the manager (our guy) knew about it and apparently condoned it. "Too dumb to know better?" now you're talking management negligence, either poorly trained or poorly promoted. Without regard to how this sorts out 2 years from now in front of a jury, or, even if it gets to a jury, it is time to pull the plug on as jerk and his manager. I don't know if I'd fire the jerk, but he wouldn't be a supervisor any more. I'm more inclined to fire the manager, but he sure as hell is going to pay for putting the company in such a delicaste position.This, as they say, ain't rocket science, and anyone who is able to stand up and take sustenance who doesn't underswtand the seriousness of this behavior, doesn't get any leeway from me. And, if I go to court, no one can say I didn't take decisive action! I'd rather defend a bs lawsuit from the disgruntled super and/oo mgr, than look namby pamby against the harraassed victim!
San Francisco, my friend, I think Marc was responding to Steve Mc's tongue-in-cheek assertion that he and his left coast mate Man-With-Hatchet are the only two participants in the discussion with enough sense to discuss it. I've been reading Steve for a long time and he does provide some tongue-twisting and interesting commentary. He's clever, but you have to watch him. He doesn't sport that PH.D. for nothing. You misunderstood Marc and I hope that Marc misunderstood Steve. If he said I don't have enough sense to discuss it, I'm hopping my hog and heading after him! x:-) I live in a real world, not a book-world or on a plane of theory.
Good catch Don, San Francisco slipped her post in ahead of mine, which I thought would be directly below Steve Mc's. And very astute of you to see my tongue firmly imbedded in my cheek.
Come on out, hog and all. We'll do a roast. But we might have to arm wrestle to see which of us gets roasted . . .
By the by, I wish I weren't so firmly planted in the real world, and dealing with issues such as this on a regular basis -- and their consequences. And my real world experience still says get the facts before going hog-wild.
Love to be able to be theoretical about it, but no time for that right now . . .
Warm regards,
Steve Mac
Steve McElfresh, PhD Principal & Founder HR Futures 408.605.1870
Dr. Steve - ah - the appreciation is mutual. Just the viewpoints differ - each person's reality is different & as someone with successful experience in the career field working with harrassment issues as well, I feel it's good to have all sides presented. Thank you for yours and have a terrific day x:-)
Comments
This guy was spoken to by the same manager who knew about the complaint and did nothing. Are you serious? The supervisor had the audacity to harass her where there were witnesses. Come on, give me a break. You must deal with the supervisor swiftly and sternly. I don't care that he was too dumb to know better. Nobody else will care either. Move him to another area. Please, please, do not tell me about causing disruption and chaos. Handle it just like you do with turnover.
Now for the real biggie.... that so called manager is worthless. He may not have thought the complaint was a concern, but it was significant enough to her to make an issue of it. This guy needs more than a few classes on harassment and behaviour. I wonder what other problems he has ignored and turned an unsympathetic ear to? I'm sure time will tell if you just sit there and hold your breath.
Sounds like I am the only one, 'cept perhaps Hatchetman, who has dealt with situations of real harassment that required a meaningful response, but were isolated, mild and inadvertent enough to not require decapitation (I was going to cite a different medical procedure, but perhaps it is outside the bounds of forum decorum).
Shadowfax is right as to the standard (judgment of strangers two years away, etc.), but I still don't know enough about the facts to be convinced that this could (much less, would) slice against the company. Even out here on the left coast, cases don't get to the jury with isolated and relatively trivial acts of harassment. I think. But maybe I don't see them. Love to see what the rest of you see is getting to trial.
Fundamentally, all I am saying, folks, is that information should precede judgment.
Regards,
Steve Mac
Steve McElfresh, PhD
Principal & Founder
HR Futures
408.605.1870
Steve, I would agree with you. In this situation, I don't have enough information regarding the supervisors specific acts to make a decision regarding disciplinary action or where to go with it. As I can recall, my company has been sued three times and all were for very egregious conduct that included physical contact and we settled those cases. When a member of management has been the harasser and investigation validated the allegations of a subordinate, the minimum action would be a final warning and transfer. I recognize this is easier for us to accomplish because we have a number of stores where we can flip-flop managers. I can't recall keeping a direct reporting relationship except in cases that the allegation was not validated or there was equal participation, perhaps. Even then, the manager is held to the higher standard to enforce our policies and not be part of the problem. Anyway, each situation has to be looked at case-by-case and the immediate and appropriate action determined based on the facts in that case.
Elizabeth
Marc, I don't think that was what I said. I haven't a clue why my responses seem to offend you, but I can only respond based upon my experience which happens to be working in a larger corporate environment. I frankly, sometimes wish that wasn't the case, but it is.
Elizabeth
Just my thoughts and opinions.
In the beginning of this thread the issue involved a female employee filing a grievance against a male supervisor alleging sexual harassment, in which the company's take on the grievance was that it does not think, “the supervisor was intending to sexually harass her - he was just too dumb to know how to behave properly." Witnesses corroborated the female employee story & the supervisor's manager counseled the supervisor - :-? strange to have the manager counsel the supervisor, as it took a grievance filing before the manager took any action on the issue – “the manager directly knew about her complaints and failed to take ANY action.” Then it appears that this same female employee is on some kind of "transition employment plan"(which means worker comp?) & your company wants her to go back to work for the supervisor - even though the counseling from the manager worked so well, x:o the supervisor continues to "protest his innocence", "doesn't care for her" and is "scared to have her back." Your company even goes further to state to the female employee (now called the 'complainant' in your post) that she's going to have to go back to work for this supervisor because "her supervisor will not be changed because of this one complaint."
Fast forward to your update. In addition to the above the company is also having problems with the female employee in that she doesn't want to be a housekeeper (transitional job), but instead wants to "go back to a "security" position" - and the company's problem? The company doesn't BELIEVE the employee when she says that she's divorced from her ex - the company KNOWS she's living with her ex & THE COMPANY FEELS MANIPULATED x:'( because they feel the employee is lying just so she can go back to the security position. Lastly, I hope xpray, we find out the company believes that this female employee, "...may also be in cohoots with a local doctor who is telling us she cannot physically do her housekeeping job at this time." And, even when presented with "detailed medical certification from her doctor" YOUR company /:) isn't sure it can trust the doctor.
I believe that employee’s work/abuse the system to their own benefit - but in this case - I completely suspect your company of potential retaliation and most definitely mismanagement. However, I am not a lawyer and I agree with another poster - this issue is bigger than the forum - and you should contact your attorney immediately for advice. This issue, to me, illustrates the need for smart, dynamic HR people in management positions that can affect change in a company and it’s culture – and the mess that’s created when HR isn’t.
Elizabeth
Come on out, hog and all. We'll do a roast. But we might have to arm wrestle to see which of us gets roasted . . .
By the by, I wish I weren't so firmly planted in the real world, and dealing with issues such as this on a regular basis -- and their consequences. And my real world experience still says get the facts before going hog-wild.
Love to be able to be theoretical about it, but no time for that right now . . .
Warm regards,
Steve Mac
Steve McElfresh, PhD
Principal & Founder
HR Futures
408.605.1870
See Steve, that's the thing about the 'real world' - everyone's differs.
Yes. And from understanding those differences comes better action -- which is, of course, one of the great values of the forum.
That was the message of the first line of my first posting above. Thanks. I am glad you are here.
Regards,
Steve Mac
Steve McElfresh, PhD
Principal & Founder
HR Futures
408.605.1870