Supervisor suspension

We are in the process of disciplining a supervisor...the infraction typically carries a 5-day suspension...the department head has asked that we assign suspension days only 2 days each week until the 5-day is reached due to business needs....

for example, the suspension would be carried out over 2 weeks, alternating days.

Our policy never took such a thing into consideration and says nothing about consecutive days...it has just always been interpreted this way...

what do you think?

Comments

  • 9 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • I think breaking out the suspension over time dilutes the impact of the "punishment".

    The department head wants this person around to meet his/her business needs but the employee did something serious enough merit a five day suspension. Seems to me that if an employee did something that serious, they won't be meeting your business needs anyway. Is it simply inconvenient for the department head to lose this person for five days straight?


    If your policy allows a five day suspension, I say make it five consecutive days. I'd also reconsider the policy. An infraction severe enough to merit five days is probably severe enough to result in termination.
  • If the policy says five consecutive days, then that's what it is--period. Stand your ground on
    this one, or you will have to do the same with every future suspension. We have had management personnel who wamted to to circumvent our policy, as well. (Thankfully, our CEO and the VPs support us. Our CEO simply made the statement at one of our managers'meetings that perhaps anyone who disagrees with adherence to policies might like to be suspended for refusing to follow an established policy.)
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 03-08-04 AT 02:24PM (CST)[/font][br][br]Are you prepared to do this for everyone who does something serious enough to warrant a five day suspension. Next time it could be an ee who needs a paycheck every week.
    The department head is responsible for seeing that the suspended ees job is still done. What if the ee had become sick for a week. Suspend for five consecutive days. And tell the department head to do his/her job.

    I have decided to vent. I am sick and tired of management people who demand that an ee be suspended---so long as it doesn't inconvience the manager.
  • Just a word of caution: if this is a salaried supervisor, then you can't break up the suspension and maitain the exemption, unloess the suspension is for violation of a major safety rule. Good luck!
  • I agree with Shadow's point, but am somewhat surprised by the remainder of the answers. While I've only 'broken up' a suspension like this on one occasion, what's the problem with enforcing the suspension on terms which are best for the business? I have some employees who would look at a one week suspension as a vacation, as opposed to three weeks of intermittent work as more of a punishment.
  • Any ee who has to be suspended for 5 days obviously did something that was not best for the company. I have never known a suspension (even for one day) that didn't in some way inconvenience the company. Others have stated in better terms than I why, for the big picture, the suspension should not be broken up.
  • It's not that you can't break up the suspension, it's that you can't break it up and expect it to be unpaid. You can certainly suspend an exempt employee for 2 days, but if they've performed any work for you during the workweek, you have to pay them as suspensions are not a reason to make a deduction from an exempt employee's pay. If you want the suspension to be unpaid, it has to be a full workweek in which the exempt employee performs no work.
  • I agree with HRQ. The impact of the suspension, obviously for a serious infraction of policy, will be lost. Also, consider the reaction of ee's who are not given this option. Inconvenience of management may be avoided next time if the supv. learns his/her lesson and knows they will not be shown preferential treatment.

  • This type of suspension is meant to be punitive by it's very nature. It is not a suspension while some incident is investigated, it is a suspension as a result of a disicplinary process.

    If it is not for a safety violation, then the EE must be paid for a full week if any work is done in that week. Intermittent suspension just becomes extra days off with pay for the EE. What kind of message does that send? "Go ahead and screw up big time, you will get some extra paid holidays."

    Yes, the business gets hurt by the absence of it's employees. Discipline is a serious business and everyone in the cycle had to own a piece of the problem. From the supervisor who did not adequately train and/or supervise the individual, to fellow EEs who expressed tacit approval through silence, etc. When serious breakdowns occur and the disciplinary process is this severe, but not a termination, someone obviously thinks this EE still can be "reformed" to be add value to the company.

    So ask yourself, is a suspension the right step to take in this reformation process? Does the suspension advance the goals of the company? Someone must have already answered yes to implement the suspension. Now it sounds like at least one person in management is not so sure. These uncertainties should have been expressed before the fact, not after. It is too late now to undo this one. Suspend for a whole work week and deal with the results.
Sign In or Register to comment.