Discipline in the Workplace
Discipline in the Workplace
Discipline in the workplace is the means by which supervisory personnel correct behavioural deficiencies and ensure adherence to established company rules. The purpose of discipline is correct behaviour. It is not designed to punish or embarrass an employee
Often, a positive approach may solve the problem without having to discipline. However, if unacceptable behaviour is a persistent problem or if the employee is involved in a misconduct that cannot be tolerated, management may use discipline to correct the behaviour.
In general, discipline should be restricted to the issuing of letters of warning, letters of suspensions, or actual termination. Employers should refrain from “disciplining” employees by such methods as altering work schedules, assigning an employee to do unpleasant work, or denying vacation requests.
1. Examples of Misconduct
2. Just Cause and its Effect on Discipline
3. The Discipline Process at a Glance
4. Conducting an Investigation
5. Investigative Interviews
6. Common Interview Problems
7. Discipline Stage
8. Sequence of Events
Just Cause and its Affect on Discipline
In reviewing whether or not management was correct in its choice to discipline, arbitrators have looked at a number of factors. These factors must be taken into account by management when deciding to use discipline:
1. Did the employee clearly understand the rule or policy that was violated?
For example, were the work rules or policy provided to the employee prior to the violation. It is management responsibility to prove that the employee knew the rule or policy.
2. Was the rule or policy consistently and fairly enforced by management?
For example, did management have a history of ignoring the departmental policy on wearing safety equipment, but singled out an employee for discipline anyway.
3. Did the employee know that violating the rule or policy could lead to discipline?
4. The seriousness of the offense in terms of violating company rules of conduct or company obligations.
For example, being a few minutes late for a shift would not be viewed as being as serious an offense as striking another employee or stealing University property.
5. The long service of the employee.
6. The previous good (or bad) work record of the employee.
7. Provocation.
Was the employee pushed into acting rudely or violently as a result of management or a customer’s actions. This is a very common defense for employees involved in insubordination.
8. Did the employee admit to the misconduct and apologize for their behavior?
Arbitrators will often rule harshly against employees who are deceptive during an investigation and who show no remorse for their action
The Discipline Process at a Glance
1. The investigation stage.
This is perhaps the most important part of the discipline process. Discipline cases are often won or lost based upon the amount of effort put into the investigation. At this stage the manager should be gathering facts and evidence to confirm what took place. This evidence might include witness statements, a report from a private investigator, documentary evidence, interviewing witnesses to the incident, and most important of all, interviewing the employee involved in the misconduct.
The employee interview is the key to the investigation, and it is should play a major in role in management’s decision to issue discipline. Even when there is overwhelming evidence of an employee’s guilt, it is still essential to interview the employee. An employee involved in a misconduct should be provided an opportunity to explain themselves.
2. The discipline stage.
Once management has heard the employee’s explanation in the interview, verified the facts and gathered all the evidence, the decision to discipline can be made. Ideally, the decision should be made after discussions with other people in management, and talking about the specifics of the case with the Human Resources Department. The basis for discipline should also take into account, the factors discussed in the section on “just cause”, i.e., the employee’s past record, the severity of the incident, was the employee provoked. Ideally, discipline will not be issued “verbally” to an employee. Discipline should be issued in writing to an employee and only after the investigation and interviews have taken place.
Conducting an Investigation Into a Misconduct
The main purpose of an investigation is to determine to the best of a managers’ ability the facts surrounding a misconduct in the workplace. As a result, investigations by their very nature should be conducted in a fair and objective manner. The need for objectivity and fairness is further reinforced by the fact that in a unionized workplace, employees have the ability to grieve discipline that is issued to them. Any discipline that is grieved, could eventually find itself before an arbitrator who will examine in detail the strength of the evidence and the fairness of the discipline.
Points to consider when conducting an investigation:
1. Conduct an investigation with another member of Management.
Where possible, two members of management should work together when conducting an investigation that could result in discipline. Ideally, these two managers will interview all witnesses together. Having two managers conduct an investigation provides the opportunity for Management to call two witnesses to testify to events. It also provides for better note taking and documentation of questions and answers during interviews. Consideration should be given to whether or not an investigating manager would make a good witness in a future hearing. Some individuals do not make good witnesses. Consideration should also be given as to whether or not a manager will be available six months to a year later to testify in any future hearing. A manager who will be leaving the University is not a good choice as an investigator.
2. Union representation during an investigation
There is a requirement for a shop steward to be present when interviewing a unionized employee where there is a reasonable belief that the employee may be disciplined. There is no requirement for a steward to be present if Management wants to interview an employee who was only a witness to a misconduct or who is providing a complaint regarding another employee or member of management.
3. Talk to as many witnesses as possible when conducting an investigation
If it has been determined that there are witnesses to a misconduct, Management should meet with these witnesses in order to determine the best possible picture of the incident that has occurred. These meetings should be conducted formally, if possible, and notes taken of the witnesses’ statements and answers to questions. If possible, request a written statement from any witnesses. While a written statement is often helpful, it does not replace the need to sit down and formally interview a witness.
4. Investigate the paper trail
There is often a substantial amount of “documentary” evidence that can be used to support evidence of a misconduct. Examples of this include financial records, time cards, phone records (the University can obtain a record of every telephone call made on campus) computer records, e-mails, policy documents, performance appraisals etc.
When conducting an investigation, the security of this evidence must always be considered. There is always the possibility of this type of evidence being destroyed or altered if news of an investigation becomes known.
During an investigation, the employee’s personal file should also be reviewed to determine if the employee has in fact been disciplined previously. If the employee has been previously disciplined, this should be mentioned in any subsequent discipline letter.
5. Seek outside help to investigate evidence of misconduct
No comments:
Post a Comment