disciplinary process question

abbey2000

hi, i am looking for people's opinion on the following situation.

I am a supervisor in a large company. i am dealing with an employee, lets call her X. She is currently on a verbal warning for attendance issues.

Now she is having issues with her work performance, and there has been an incident that warrents a warning (i wont go into the details of this, but trust me, it is a warning offence). HR agrees that it is a warning offence to.

In my opinion, X should now proceed to a written warning, as she is currently on a verbal. But HR is telling me that I need to issue her with a separate informal warning for the performance issue? HR sees this as a separate issue altogether.

I argue that no, there is only one disciplinary process in our company, that there are not separate warning processes. If we proceeded like this, then we would never be in a position to fire anyone at all!

For example, if there were 5 different points on your job description, then according to HR you could potentially be on 5 different warnings for each incident that may potentially occur in each of the 5 different areas! I stated this to HR and they agreed that this would be the case?

I have worked in my company for 10 years, I have never come across this before. Our previous HR rep did not operate in this way, there was one process, and unfortunatley once you started on it, it continued. Any incident that occurs with an employee is a performance related issue, so proposing that we have separate processes does not make any sense to me at all.

Has anyone ever heard of a disciplinary process operating in this way in any company? I would appreciate your opinions on this, sorry if it got a bit long winded! Thanks.

Xiney

I would argue to your HR person that attendance is just as much a performance issue as her actual work.

I would also bring up past cases (precedent) in the company.


I'm not in HR though.

Sleipnir

I've never heard of that OP. Have you a written disciplinary procedure? If someone is consistenly late, they get a verbal warning. If then their work standard then drops off, they get a written warning, not another verbal.....
Weird.

abbey2000

hi, op here. we do have a disciplinary process, but the new HR person seems to be changing it. Our employee hand book outlines the process as:

* informal verbal warning (informal, guidance with supervisor; not recorded on employees file)
* verbal warning
* 1st written
* final written

It does not state anywhere in our process that there will be warnings issued for each individual incident that may occur. but neither does it state that it wont happen either. it just does make any sense to me, and i do not want us to go down this road of having multiple warnings for staff. its crazy in my opinion.

Nody

Sorry to say but not unheard of; the reason is it requires different approaches in terms of training etc. of the user to avoid it in the future. If not the person could be on say final written for attendance and then be fired for poor quality of work which they have received no support to improve.

Mrs OBumble

What is your objective here, to fire the person, or to fix the problem(s). As a supervisor, it should be the latter.

In the current climate, cost-control needs to be applied to things like unjustified dismissal costs too, sounds like your new HR person is ensuring that if it gets to this, you will have a water-tight case.

abbey2000

the objective is to fix the problem with the employee if at all possible, AND to ensure that we are consistent with how we are handling all situations such as this.

Jo King

The employee should just be given a verbal warning. The complaint is of a different nature to previous warnings. If the employee is fired eventually the onus will be on the employer to justify it. There has to be a clear link from initial verbal warning followed by a failure to make amends followed by a written warning and so on. If there is a verbal warning about an issue and the employee improves, that should be the end of it. It should not be considered in relation to other issues relating to that employee. Losing a case at the EAT has become a lot more expensive since the recession started. You HR is being sensible in its approach. A series of minor infractions may be annoying but if they clear up after a verbal warning that is better that a firing EAT case and sourcing a replacement.

Joe_scooter

Leave the girl alone. Sounds like you are "managing out" an employee who might be stronger than you. People don't need that stress in Ireland at the moment. Why don't you just pull her aside informally, have a chat in the pub and tell her what could happen down the line if what you consider serious doesn't change? I mean, whatever happened to a little compassion or are you just protecting your own arse?

I have seen this before, goes on in the USA MNC's all the time. I bet your working in one of those? I have seen people shifted out of the professions on the basis of not being good enough but who yet have had stuff subsequently published so it's not always all that it seems.

Back off and actually exercise man management skills where you get the best out of the employee without being a bully.

abbey2000 wrote: »

If we proceeded like this, then we would never be in a position to fire anyone at all!

You sound like you get off on firing people. What's the personal circumstances of the person you are looking at firing? Have they bank loans/mortgages/children to feed? Think twice before acting cos you can reap what you sow.

abbey2000 wrote: »

hi, i am looking for people's opinion on the following situation.

I am a supervisor in a large company. i am dealing with an employee, lets call her X. She is currently on a verbal warning for attendance issues.

Now she is having issues with her work performance, and there has been an incident that warrents a warning (i wont go into the details of this, but trust me, it is a warning offence). HR agrees that it is a warning offence to.

In my opinion, X should now proceed to a written warning, as she is currently on a verbal. But HR is telling me that I need to issue her with a separate informal warning for the performance issue? HR sees this as a separate issue altogether.

I argue that no, there is only one disciplinary process in our company, that there are not separate warning processes. If we proceeded like this, then we would never be in a position to fire anyone at all!

For example, if there were 5 different points on your job description, then according to HR you could potentially be on 5 different warnings for each incident that may potentially occur in each of the 5 different areas! I stated this to HR and they agreed that this would be the case?

I have worked in my company for 10 years, I have never come across this before. Our previous HR rep did not operate in this way, there was one process, and unfortunatley once you started on it, it continued. Any incident that occurs with an employee is a performance related issue, so proposing that we have separate processes does not make any sense to me at all.

Has anyone ever heard of a disciplinary process operating in this way in any company? I would appreciate your opinions on this, sorry if it got a bit long winded! Thanks.

gerrycollins

the only best practise is to treat each "offence" individually.

You gave her a warning for the performance issue and you should have also given her a timeframe and areas to improve on?

if you did and the timeframe is now up and she has

a. suscessfully met all standards which means the case can be put to bed but if the same offence occurs within 6 months you can recommence procedures against the employee ie go to the next stage

b. failed to meet all the standards required and is still has a performance issue a written warning is issued,stage 2, again repeating a time frame and standards to be met of course a shorter term now.

if in the mean time the same employee commits an offence which has nothing what so ever to do with the originaly offence they cannot be treated or joined together.

your company employes due process in the matter of displinary procedures.

if you gave this girl an immediate written warning as a carry on from the originaly verbal warning and she were to be eventually sacked because of either offences (or quit) then due process for each offence was not followed through hence unfair dismissal/constructive dismissal.

your HR is right bottom line, your old HR was an donkey to suggest otherwise.

wmpdd3

Joe_scooter wrote: »

"Leave the girl alone. Sounds like you are "managing out" an employee who might be stronger than you. People don't need that stress in Ireland at the moment. Why don't you just pull her aside informally, have a chat in the pub and tell her what could happen down the line if what you consider serious doesn't change? I mean, whatever happened to a little compassion or are you just protecting your own arse?

I have seen this before, goes on in the USA MNC's all the time. I bet your working in one of those? I have seen people shifted out of the professions on the basis of not being good enough but who yet have had stuff subsequently published so it's not always all that it seems. "

My god that's a bit unprofessional.

I'm all for a pep talk to get staff on track after they have been through the discipline process. You can't just sidestep it.
In any process I've worked with, different issues warrant their own address.

It can be really annoying but if the warning doesn't improve performance with your support, then the process will ultimately decide that persons future.

The process is there for a reason so you can apply the same rules to each employee.

Joe_scooter

Joe_scooter wrote: »

"Leave the girl alone. Sounds like you are "managing out" an employee who might be stronger than you. People don't need that stress in Ireland at the moment. Why don't you just pull her aside informally, have a chat in the pub and tell her what could happen down the line if what you consider serious doesn't change? I mean, whatever happened to a little compassion or are you just protecting your own arse?

I have seen this before, goes on in the USA MNC's all the time. I bet your working in one of those? I have seen people shifted out of the professions on the basis of not being good enough but who yet have had stuff subsequently published so it's not always all that it seems. "

wmpdd3 wrote: »

My god that's a bit unprofessional.

It's realism, a reality check for all of you who think it's all rosy in the garden in corporate Ireland and for those egocentric managers and bi*ch*s out there who think people should be treated like dirt just because they don't have the title of manager. A manager should inspire confidence in the team, not destory it.

wmpdd3 wrote: »

I'm all for a pep talk to get staff on track after they have been through the discipline process. You can't just sidestep it.
In any process I've worked with, different issues warrant their own address.

It can be really annoying but if the warning doesn't improve performance with your support, then the process will ultimately decide that persons future.

The process is there for a reason so you can apply the same rules to each employee.

Look, wmpdd3, "processes" are just a cover for a manager who takes a personal dislike toward another member of staff and decides to look for "poor performance" as an excuse to move them on. It's endemic in Ireland. Are you seriously telling me that the girl which is the subject of the discussion actually goes into work to deliberately perform poorly, particularly in the current climate? Come on, smell the coffee here.

I will tell you one thing, poor performance is subjective and I have seen how that is twisted to achieve a personalised objective. It goes on in Ireland and you're in denial if you think it doesn't. I know of stories in Corporate Ireland where people in "mgt" positions have been reprimanded legally for bullying but who yet have been promoted by their organisations. Is that a culture we want in this country?

Irish people are so vindicative to other irish people it's scary. But I will tell you one thing processes are operated by human beings against another human being and they are really only an exploitation of authority. Management is supposed to be about putting in place the resources and creating the confidence for people to actually realise their potential, it's not about destroying people's self belief. I have seen it from both sides of the coin as a staff person who was supposedly performing poorly and as a manager who got the best out of other people as a result of personal experience as a bullied staff member so please, don't preach to me about unprofessionalism.

Every job is simply about serving a customer's need, be it the need of the employer or an outside third party procuring the services and everyone, and I mean everyone sets out to achieve that but employers set out to exploit and preserve their position. Employers need to remember that without staff they have nothing. It's a symboitic relationship but they seem to forget that.

Ever read Animal Farm by George Orwell? Set around communist Russia but but applies very much to capitalist Ireland also. Look at all the job losses at the moment in companies with huge profits!!! Nah, those profits aren't enough for those at the top (Gillian Bowler and her part-time €288K) they want more at the expense of the masses - let them eat cake to quote Marie Antoinette. Processes are all a joke. Treat people like animals and you need processes to control them, whereas treat them like human beings, like people and then they respond accordingly.

gerrycollins

Joe_scooter wrote: »

It's realism, a reality check for all of you who think it's all rosy in the garden in corporate Ireland and for those egocentric managers and bi*ch*s out there who think people should be treated like dirt just because they don't have the title of manager. A manager should inspire confidence in the team, not destory it.

You are correct in that a manager should inspire confidence in their team, and by that they train, coach and explore their employees talents so that they can be the best of the best.

What do you do when you get to a stage where either the person doesnt want to progress any more or suddendly decides that they only want to work at what they want to not whts best for the team/company?

if a person on a team suddenly no longer plays with the team then there is an issue. be it timekeeping or performance etc how would you dela with such a matter?

abbey2000

Wow Joe Scooter,what a lot you have to say without knowing the full ins and outs of the situation!

I do not get off on firing people, I just wanted opinions on the situation. After reading the comments, it does now make sense that two processes would apply, so a verbal it would be in this case.

The girl in question will also have follow up training and will be sent on some additional training courses to try to ensure that such an incident does not occur again.

And no, she does not have a mortgage, children etc. But even if she did, if poor performance becomes a problem for the organisation, it has to be dealt with, there are certainly plenty of other people out there who would love to get her job. Spouting about power hungry managers who want to get rid of staff is not always true, sometimes people cant hack it and have to go. thats just reality.

thanks for all the responses guys

mikemac

Joe_scooter wrote: »

What's the personal circumstances of the person you are looking at firing? Have they bank loans/mortgages/children to feed? Think twice before acting cos you can reap what you sow.

How are personal circumstances even relevant in work? If you need to discipline a team or let someone I certainly hope it's done on job performance and not on choosing the young, debt free renter over the person with a family and a mortgage.

Joe_scooter wrote: »

let them eat cake to quote Marie Antoinette.

That's a myth, she never said that

abbey2000 wrote: »

The girl in question will also have follow up training and will be sent on some additional training courses to try to ensure that such an incident does not occur again.

All good so

Joe_scooter

Look mikemac, are you telling me that someone with a mortgage and kids to feed is going to work setting out to "perform poorly". It's a ****ing joke. It's just bastards of managers exploiting their own position to suit their own ends. I worked in a place where someone who had gotten a team award for the quality of their work as part of the team was sent packing a few weeks later by the team mgr on grounds of poor performance. Get real, it's used to shaft people who might just be better than the mgr. Bullying in corporate ireland is rife. Everyone, and I mean everyone should stand as one and start a revolution. "Team Player" cuts one way (in favour of the mgt). the sum of the parts is greater than the individual components but that is never reflected in wage levels.

Open your eyes. And yeah, employers are exploiting situation to their own ends now. They are ruling by fear and by respect.

Well, if personal circumstances have no place in work how come abbey2000 knows that the person has no mortgage, no children etc? You get grilled in interviews with personal questions so you tell me. Oh, so when lets say a relative or a child has a serious medical emergency are you telling me that has no relevance whatsoever to the workplace. You must be a robot so with a dead brain and no heart!!!

mikemac wrote: »

How are personal circumstances even relevant in work? If you need to discipline a team or let someone I certainly hope it's done on job performance and not on choosing the young, debt free renter over the person with a family and a mortgage.



That's a myth, she never said that



All good so

Joe_scooter

abbey2000 wrote: »

Wow Joe Scooter,what a lot you have to say without knowing the full ins and outs of the situation!

I do not get off on firing people, I just wanted opinions on the situation. After reading the comments, it does now make sense that two processes would apply, so a verbal it would be in this case.

The girl in question will also have follow up training and will be sent on some additional training courses to try to ensure that such an incident does not occur again.

And no, she does not have a mortgage, children etc. But even if she did, if poor performance becomes a problem for the organisation, it has to be dealt with... Spouting about power hungry managers who want to get rid of staff is not always true, sometimes people cant hack it and have to go. thats just reality.

thanks for all the responses guys

Do you count yourself lucky to be in a job right now? You had better have because if I were your boss I'd sack you for poor performance. I mean, it is the responsibility of a mgr to bring the best out of people under their charge so when that is not happening why is it that it is never the fault of the mgr in corporate ireland? I think there is something wrong with your mgt skills if you are not getting the staff member to succeed. Ask her what her problems are, ask her in a pub, coffee shop outside of work and then take that information and actually help her. Don't put her through some loosely operated "process" where you are the judge and jury. Have her fellow team members submit their views in secret without you having access to their views and you might be in for a shock. You are part of the team too, not the person holding the whip but I bet you forgot about that didn't you!!!

abbey2000 wrote: »

there are certainly plenty of other people out there who would love to get her job.

wmpdd3

Joe_scooter wrote: »

It's just bastards of managers exploiting their own position to suit their own ends.

Am yes that would be me......

Joe_Scooter, I'm sorry your not working at the moment but stay positive and it will all come together in the end.

Checked with the process we use too and it does say to treat each issue individually. Hope this helps OP.

Joe_scooter

wmpdd3 wrote: »

Joe_scooter wrote: »

It's just bastards of managers exploiting their own position to suit their own ends.

Am yes that would be me......

Joe_Scooter, I'm sorry your not working at the moment but stay positive and it will all come together in the end.

Checked with the process we use too and it does say to treat each issue individually. Hope this helps OP.

Much appreciate the sentiments wmpdd3. People need to start showing a bit more of heart to fellow humans and that's a good start.

Godge

In good disciplinary procedures, warnings have a time limit to them, can be from weeks up to a year depending on the offence. If you reoffend within the time period you are liable for stricter penalties but if the time-period has expired, you are back to square one.

Obviously, there is also the option that for more serious offences (theft, for example) you can go straight to a more serious punishment.

donegal lass 4

sounds like disciplinary process of a call centre (mutil national)!!
this is type of place i work and every week someone from the team has disciplinary started against them for different issues......
being sick twice in a 3 month period, no shows, or quality of work issues. three strike systems applys here, doesnt matter if three instances are un-related, (ie one sick day, and poor quality) result in disciplinary is started on your file.

from the perspective of where i work, disciplinary is used as a method of keeping you in "your Place" and used as a threat to make you perform. the superiors here have no interest in any personal performance issues....or attempt to coach or help you before disciplinary is started.
think the poster should have an informal chat with employee first and offer to coach or help with any issues that may be affecting employee performance, disciplinary can be very difficult to recover from (within a given period) and lead to employee becoming un motivated and over cautious in there approach to their work. it stiffles iniative.

donegal lass 4

Initiative

Joe_scooter

Here, here. I agree with every sentiment expressed in this email. Disciplinary processes are fancy jargon for keeping the minions in line. It's like the scene from Alien Nation (remember that programme on Sky years ago where bald headed aliens landed on earth and were supposedly kept in line by "overseers"). Well we have our own version of them in Ireland. they forget there is blood flowing through their veins also. Feckin Bas***ds. They just abuse their positions. I just don't get how evil these people are when they know the outcome of the action they start out on.

donegal lass 4 wrote: »

sounds like disciplinary process of a call centre (mutil national)!!
this is type of place i work and every week someone from the team has disciplinary started against them for different issues......
being sick twice in a 3 month period, no shows, or quality of work issues. three strike systems applys here, doesnt matter if three instances are un-related, (ie one sick day, and poor quality) result in disciplinary is started on your file.

from the perspective of where i work, disciplinary is used as a method of keeping you in "your Place" and used as a threat to make you perform. the superiors here have no interest in any personal performance issues....or attempt to coach or help you before disciplinary is started.
think the poster should have an informal chat with employee first and offer to coach or help with any issues that may be affecting employee performance, disciplinary can be very difficult to recover from (within a given period) and lead to employee becoming un motivated and over cautious in there approach to their work. it stiffles iniative.

Locamon

Joe_scooter wrote: »

Here, here. I agree with every sentiment expressed in this email. Disciplinary processes are fancy jargon for keeping the minions in line.

Well you might want to consider that disciplinary processes are also there to protect the employee...in the bad old days someone would come along and fire an employee without any process and for any old excuse...at least you have the protection now that unless you do something pretty bad you cannot be unfairly targeted for dismissal without getting a warning.

craichoe

abbey2000 wrote: »

Wow Joe Scooter,what a lot you have to say without knowing the full ins and outs of the situation!

I do not get off on firing people, I just wanted opinions on the situation. After reading the comments, it does now make sense that two processes would apply, so a verbal it would be in this case.

The girl in question will also have follow up training and will be sent on some additional training courses to try to ensure that such an incident does not occur again.

And no, she does not have a mortgage, children etc. But even if she did, if poor performance becomes a problem for the organisation, it has to be dealt with, there are certainly plenty of other people out there who would love to get her job. Spouting about power hungry managers who want to get rid of staff is not always true, sometimes people cant hack it and have to go. thats just reality.

thanks for all the responses guys

Unfortunatly when it comes to Disciplinary procedure, HR have final say, you should only follow procedure and not try to butt heads with HR on this, keep notes on everything and send updates to HR on a weekly basis.

Don't try to get around the procedure, just follow it to the letter and you're in the clear as you're doing your job.