Retaliation ??
HR IN AL
37 Posts
I have an employee who is a constant troublemaker and is constantly being complained about by others although we have never been able to pin anything on her. She and another employee got into verbal argument last week and troublemaker is saying that other employee threated to kill her. Here is the problem. When the supervisor heard the commotion and came up , He told them both to be quiet and took them to office (where I was on vacation of course) and they were talked to. I come in MOnday and she has put a written statement on my desk saying the other person threatened her and she says the Supervisor heard it. My supervisor says all he heard was them arguing and did not hear the threat. She is calling the supervisor a liar. We are going to talk to her again stating that he didn't hear. I mentioned to my plant manager and he said that she is being insuboridinate by calling supervisor a liar. He wants me to suspend her for it. I am not comfortable with this. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated. Sometimes your thoughts get me thinking in different direction.
Comments
Was anyone else around to hear this? Do you believe your supervisor?
Sorry for all the questions.
I totally believe my supervisor but don't agree with my Plant Manager with suspending her.
What stops you from getting rid of this employee who you describe as a "constant troublemaker"?
You are asking if you can suspend the 'troublemaker' for insubordination against her boss because she called him a liar, correct? You are not wanting to suspend the employee that the 'troublemaker' accused of making threats?
Okay the lack of sleep is getting to me.
I agree with Paul. Won't hear me say that too often.
She would argue "I was threatened and when I made this known to my supervisors they retaliated against me and suspended me."
Hopefully your interview with the other employee will shed some light on this. Otherwise I think you could have some difficulty defending your position.
For several months I had to manage him very carefully while our supervisors cried out for him to be fired. The thing was, he was from a protected class and he also had an ongoing injury (not workers comp). I didnt want a retaliation claim so I felt I had to be very shrewd in my dealings with him.
Eventually, he slipped up and violated our policies in a major way. That was our opportunity to remove him from the organization which we did. I was happy with how things turned out.
I am still in contact with this person. He came from a difficult home and I would like to see him succeed in life. Even though we fired him, he left here feeling we had treated him fairly.
Its unlikely you will be as fortunate as we were given the individual you are dealing with sounds like a bad apple but I would recommend that you watch carefully for your opportunity to remove this troublemaker from your organization.
Investigating whether the threat actually occured is a separate issue from the "insuborination" of calling the supervisor a liar. If the employee is maintaining the threat occured, what evidence does she have. Has she filed a report with the police? You should investigate this allegation on its own.
A word to the wise, I would kick the habit of referring to the employee as "troublemaker." Although you are speaking among friends on the forum, you never know when referring to the employee as a troublemaker will come back to bite you. Also, even if the employee's photo is in the dictionary under "troublemaker", it doesn't mean she is making things up in this instance. I counsel supervisors all of the time not to assume an employee is guilty just because the employee was guilty of a similar infraction in the past. Even if the employee was guilty the last 50 times, investigate the 51st infraction fairly and without bias. Rushing to judgement before you have all of the facts leads to lawsuits.
Even employees who cause trouble deserve a fair process.
Come Monday morning this employee who had been threatened showed up at work with a gun and killed the other worker who had threatened him the previous Friday.
First thing the HR person should have done is separate the employees. After an employee has been threatened with death, they should NOT be working together until an investigation has been completed.
Add to that the employee (who had been threatened) had tried many times to transfer to another school but had been denied....even though there were job openings. I wouldn't be surprised if a lawsuit is filed in the future by both sides.
Now 2 families are broken and torn apart.
Lesson - take EVERY threat seriously until proven untrue.
If progressive discipline is being used I would document, document, document and rid yourself of the troubled worker. It never ceases to amaze me that in the tough ecomonic times that the entire US is facing you still have immature people that want to stir the hornets nest. In our case it was the most positive managment decision that had been made a very long time. We did not fight the unemployment and were never so happy to be rid of that employee!
:welcome: