Progressive Discipline

Ever since she was hired, Meredith had a problem with habitual tardiness. According to department attendance records, Meredith had been late to work at least 20 times each year since she joined the company in 2013. Most of the time, she was late less than 30 minutes, but occasionally she was an hour or more late to work. Meredith is the mother of 2 school-age children, and her husband traveled frequently for his job. Meredith claimed that many of the times she was late was because of weather-related school delays or a child’s illness and her inability to get a babysitter on short notice. Since Meredith was a salaried employee, she never lost wages for the working hours she missed. On June 26, her supervisor, with concurrence from the department manager, terminated her employment. Meredith did not dispute the number of times that she had been late, but she filed a grievance with the Human Resource Department, alleging that management did not follow the company’s written progressive disciplinary process, which consisted of the following: Verbal Caution. An employee will be given a verbal caution when s/he engages in problematic behavior. Verbal Warning. The immediate supervisor meets privately with the employee, discusses the problem, and indicates that the meeting is a verbal warning. The verbal warning is documented and placed in the employee’s personnel file for 90 days. Written Warning. A written warning is issued when the employee engages in the unacceptable behavior during the period that the verbal warning is in effect. The warning details what the problem is, how the employee should change his/her behavior to fix the problem, and the consequences if s/he does not comply. The written warning is placed in the employee’s personnel file for 90 days and a copy is given to the employee. Final Warning. The supervisor meets with the employee, reviews instances when the unacceptable behavior occurred during the period that the written warning is in effect, and advises that termination will result if improvement does not occur. Termination. If the problem is not resolved, the supervisor must meet with the employee, review the documentation and terminate the employee. Meredith acknowledged that she had been given several verbal cautions, a verbal warning, and a written warning. However, she claims that she was never given a final warning before her termination. Meredith’s supervisor and the department manager point to the fact that the employee handbook clearly states that employment is at-will, meaning that both the employer and the employee have the right to terminate the relationship at any time for any reason. They acknowledge that a final warning was not issued but point to the fact that the written warning to Meredith stated, “Continued instances of tardiness may result in suspension without pay or termination.” They claimed that a final warning would have served no purpose since she continued to come in late to work even after several verbal cautions, a verbal warning, and a written warning. Questions: Evaluate the argument of Meredith in this case. Are her claims valid? Was she treated fairly in this case? Why or why not? Evaluate the argument of the supervisor and manager in this case. Are their claims valid? Was their firing of Meredith fair in this case? Why or why not? As the Human Resource Manager of the company, will you uphold Meredith’s termination or reinstate her? What facts of the case caused you to respond this way?

Sample Solution

Evaluating Meredith's Argument

Meredith's argument hinges on the alleged violation of the company's progressive disciplinary policy, specifically the omission of a final warning before termination. She asserts that the company's failure to adhere to its own disciplinary guidelines constitutes unfair treatment.

Validity of Meredith's Claims

Meredith's claims have some validity. The company's written progressive disciplinary policy outlines a clear process for addressing employee conduct issues, including tardiness. While Meredith acknowledges receiving several verbal cautions, a verbal warning, and a written warning, she maintains that she was never given a final warning as outlined in the policy.

Full Answer Section

Fairness of Meredith's Treatment

The question of whether Meredith was treated fairly is more complex. On one hand, the company's failure to follow its own disciplinary policy could be considered unfair. However, the company's argument that the written warning explicitly stated the potential consequences of continued tardiness, including termination, also holds merit.

Evaluating the Supervisor and Manager's Argument

The supervisor and manager's argument rests on two key points: the at-will employment nature of the relationship and the explicit warning in the written warning about potential termination.

Validity of Their Claims

Their claim regarding at-will employment is valid. At-will employment generally allows employers to terminate employees for any reason or no reason at all, without the need for a formal disciplinary process. However, this principle does not preclude employers from establishing and following their own disciplinary policies.

Fairness of Their Actions

Their decision to terminate Meredith without a final warning could be considered questionable in light of the company's own disciplinary policy. While the written warning did inform Meredith of the potential consequences, a final warning might have provided a clearer indication of the imminent risk of termination.

Human Resource Manager's Decision

As the Human Resource Manager, I would carefully consider both sides of the argument before making a decision. While Meredith's tardiness was a persistent issue, the company's deviation from its own disciplinary policy raises concerns about fairness.

Factors Influencing the Decision

Several factors would influence my decision:

Severity of Meredith's tardiness: While some tardiness was due to extenuating circumstances, the frequency and extent of her tardiness could be considered disruptive to the workplace.
Company's past practice: If the company has a history of strictly adhering to its disciplinary policy, the deviation in Meredith's case could be considered unfair.
Meredith's overall performance: If Meredith's performance was otherwise satisfactory, her tardiness might not justify immediate termination.

Possible Outcomes

After careful consideration, I would likely recommend one of the following actions:

Reinstate Meredith with a final warning: This would provide Meredith with a clear chance to improve her attendance record while upholding the company's disciplinary policy.
Negotiate a separation agreement: This would allow Meredith to leave the company with some severance package, avoiding the stigma of termination.
Uphold termination: If Meredith's tardiness was deemed excessive and disruptive, termination might be considered the most appropriate course of action.

Conclusion

The case of Meredith highlights the importance of clear communication, consistent policy enforcement, and a balance between fairness and maintaining a productive work environment. Employers should strive to adhere to their own disciplinary policies while also giving employees opportunities to improve their performance.

We are here to help

We have crazy offers

It’s quick and easy to place an order. We have an efficient customer service that works 24/7 to assist you.It’s quick and easy to place an order. We have an efficient customer service that works 24/7 to assist you.

We are here and ready to help

Order Now