Immediate termination for safety violation?

Employee 1 is adjusting the blade on a radial arm saw, and has not followed proper lock out/tag out procedure.
Employee 2 decides, as a joke, to turn on the saw while 1's hand is inside and very very close to the blade.
No injury occurs, but 1 could have easily lost a finger, or entire hand.

I suggested that we write 1 up for failure to adhere to lock out/tag out, and terminate 2 for blatant disregard for safety regardless of the outcome of the incident.

My outdie HR consultant agrees with me 100% but I'm getting resistance from the foreman and manager because it's 2's first safety violation. I don't beleive that progressive discipline is at all appropriate in this case.

Could you help me with some ammo against their arguements? Perhaps case law involving employees suing for inactivity on the company's part after serious safety violations?

Also, 2 left for a 3 week vacation outside of the country only days after the incident. Can we just mail him a termination letter or do we need to actually contact him either in person or over the phone should we decide to go ahead with the termination?

Thanks!

Comments

  • 12 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • What is your normal policy on safety violations? I ask because I would have to agree with your foreman and manager. This is the first safety violation for employee #2 but yet employee #1 will only get a write up for his first safety violation? You are sending mixed messages here regardless of the infraction.

    Personally I would suspend the employee without pay, let him know that the next occurance of any sort and he will be terminated immediately. However it probably has already hurt morale knowing that he got in an accident, violated company policy and then immediately following took three weeks paid vacation.

    This is not a good situation for anyone there except employee #2. Let us know how it all worked out...thanks.
  • We do have progressive discipline for safety violations, but the handbook also allows for immediate termination when warranted. I feel that this case is serious enough given the fact that the injury could have been so severe and the fact that it was not an accident, but rather on purpose. I think having someone around who seems to think it's ok, or funny to endanger another person in that way is a bad idea.

  • How long has ee #2 been employed there? If he was a long term ee and this was his first lapse, I'd be a little more lenient and maybe just suspend. If a relatively new ee, I side with you, immediate termination. If you go that route, I would wait and let him go his first day back. Grab him when he walks in the door and do it face to face.
  • He's been an employee for 4 years. He is not at all liked by his peers, but for whatever currently unknown reason the foreman thinks he can do no wrong. His direct supervisor doesn't think he's a worker worth keeping.
  • aliciac - upon reading your posts, just wanted to put my two-cents in.

    1. Your original post indicates there were "days" between the incident and when #2 went on vacation. Was there an interview conducted with him about this incident prior to his leave? If NOT my opinion is you really should conduct one as soon as he returns before making a final decision.

    2. Your other posts indicate that #2 is a "problem" employee with some managers/co-workers, is this documented in his reviews? If not these admissions, in my opinion, should NOT enter into your decision to terminate. Your decision should be based solely on documented facts and your policy.

    3. PLEASE don't terminate during vacation. Wait until you are face-to-face to review the incident and possible termination. If you haven't spoken to #2 about this incident, there could be facts you are unaware of. Also there are HUGE risks with any termination and being terminated after probably spending lots of bucks on a vacation will add even more stress to an already emotional situation.

    I wish you the best of luck with this one....


  • 1. He was spoken to just before going on his vacation and he apologized for having turned the saw on. He is aware that he's in a bit of hot water.

    2. This is not documented because the foreman likes him, and is the one who does reviews. I know this shouldn't enter into the final decision but it's proven difficult to seperate that from his actions.

    3. We don't plan to terminate during the vacation. We will certainly have a face to face if that's the route that we end up taking.


  • Any employee who plays practical jokes of that type should be dismissed immediately - no questions asked!
  • See, and I tend to agree with you whole-heartedly as does my company's outside consultant.
    Other professionals, however, clearly feel this is too harsh. I'm a bit confused as to why anyone would allow a person like this to stay. I'm also very concerned that the employee who had the 'joke' played on him would have a case for some employment practices liability suit or something.

    Anyone hear of such a case being brought for improper handling of a safety issue?

  • IMHO, I would suspend Employee #1 for not following safety procedures (LO/TO). I say this because had he/she utilized LO/TO, the saw would not have been able to be turned on in the first place. I would also terminate Employee #2, for reckless horseplay and safety violation. After being employed for 4 years, this is not excusable.

    Good luck and I will be watching to see what you actually do.


  • Whether you term or not is a decision you never take lightly. But in this case, I would offer this simple observation: IMHO, if you DON'T term for this, I can't imagine what safety violations you ever WOULD term for. Which precedent do you want to set?
  • I agree with all the comments on this being a major safety violation that warrants a severe punishment for #1's LOTO violation and the termination of #2 for blatanly disregarding safety at the expense of possible serious injury to another employee.

    If that, however, isn't enough justification for terminating #2; what about terminating him for violating your "Violence in the Workplace" policy. If one of our employees attacked a fellow employee with much less possible serious ramifications, we would term that employee. We termininated an employee two years ago for THREATENING to bring a gun to work to hurt another employee. It was just a threat. No actual gun was involved and the threatening employee said he was just joking, but we still terminated the employee. In the investigation the threatened employee didn't think it was a joke. In your case #2 actually did something that could have maimed another employee for life and possible even killed him (could have bled to death if arm or hand had been severed).

    Bottom line get rid of #2 before someone is seriously hurt. You have more than enough justification.
  • I would immediately terminate #2 as soon as he returns from his vacation. Turning on a saw while an fellow employee's hand is in or near the saw is gross misconduct, blatant disregard for his co-worker's well-being, and borderline criminal conduct. It should absolutely not be tolerated. You do not need a warning to know that it's wrong to risk cutting someone's fingers or hand off. This guy is an immature idiot and a lawsuit waiting to happen.

    In the case of #1, this warrants a warning at the minimum, assuming your company has kept up with your lockout/tagout authorized level training. If he has violated your policy before, it may warrant a final warning or termination. If you haven't done documented annual authorized-level lockout/tagout training, you need to do this ASAP.

    You have to have a no tolerance policy for safety violations, or you are condoning an unsafe work environment and setting yourself up for trouble.
Sign In or Register to comment.