Opinions please!

Squishypig

A former employee (waitress) was termed on 2/9/02 and she called and wanted to get a copy of the in house separation report that was completed when she was fired for her performance. She basically said that she was upset and crying when she signed it, visibly upset. She said that she would like a copy because she "had learned an expensive lesson" before. (???????)

I know a rule of thumb is that if an employee has signed it, there should be no reason not to give her a copy. I am just really uncomfortable giving out copies of in house separation notices, especially when she did receive the formal separation notice sent to the LDOL which contains the same information.

Should I just suck it up and send her a copy of the form she signed or tell her that the formal separation notice would suffice?

awilliams

Is this form in her personnel file? Many state have state laws that require employers to allow employees to view & COPY all documents in their personnel file. If this form is in her PF, or should be, then save yourself the aggrivation of having her come in and sift through her file, make copies and pay you $.08 a copy and just mail it to her.

Don D

No, you should not "suck it up and send her a copy". She should "suck it up and understand she's not GETTING a copy". Let me back up and assume your State doesn't have some sort of law requiring you to give an ex-employee such documents from the file. Our state does not. It is our practice to not give an employee copies of such documents, whether requested or not. In fact, even though we are frequently asked to do so, we do not ever give an employee a reason for their separation in writing. Again, our state does not require that. Yours may. There is no purpose that could remotely be in the employer's interest to do so. Let her get her copy from the UI division office if she filed a claim and let her have it subpoenaed if she wants to go in that direction. Our state does not even require that the employer let an employee see their personnel file, much less get a copy of some document from it. We do utilize the best practice, sensible approach to that and we will sit down with an employee and go through their file with them; however, requests for documents are generally denied.

bsa

I vote to give it to her. 34¢ is a small price to pay to prevent other more costly legal gyrations.

Don D

It would be one thing if "34 cents" were the issue. But, I fear it's not that simple. She wants the documentation for a reason and it's not for self improvement. The reason could not be in the employer's interest. Absolutely could not be. I smell a potential challenge in her motivation; either to file some sort or charge or to give to a hungry, creative attorney. I guess the simplest way to decide is to ask yourself; How might my company benefit if I give her a copy of this internal investigation and discharge document?

Squishypig

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 03-21-02 AT 03:52PM (CST)[/font][p]
But by giving her a copy of the form, that does not neccessary decrease our risk of litigation. And from what I understand about Louisiana law, discharged employees legally only have access to certain medical/health information. If she is so intent on suing us (and I am totally speculating here), then she would do it whether she had the form or not.

Margaret Morford

As long as the internal report does not contradict what the company filed with unemployment, I'd give it to her. I suspect your internal report has more detail, which is not a bad thing. I'd give her a copy for no other reason than if she's going to a lawyer and/or the EEOC, it may scare them off if the documentation is good. If she sues you, she's going to get a hold of it any way.

Margaret Morford
theHRedge
615-371-8200
[email]mmorford@mleesmith.com[/email]
[url]http://www.thehredge.net[/url]

Carol CA

I agree with Margaret. You mentioned that the information in the internal report was the same as the information in the formal report you gave her. As long as the information is the same, I don't see why you shouldn't give it to her. Giving her the information may help her (or her attorney) see that you had sufficient documentation, were consistent, and they might as well drop it. By not giving her the information, you are setting up an antagonistic relationship which won't help down the line, and you leave her wondering what was really in the report, thus fueling her fire.

Gillian

I concur with the "give her the paper" approach. Refusing to do so will just create more anger and the paper is discoverable anyway so she will get it sooner or later.

Don D

Our very wise labor attorney frequently quotes this: "Never, ever do the opposing attorneys job of discovery for him. If you do, he will thank you forever, but he will go to the bank alone." My opposing opinion to most of the above responders remains this: Providing all these documents that people say "are discoverable anyway" and "will only have to be produced later" are doing one thing: Providing somebody with what they need to prepare and advance their case against you without them having to spend any of the time and energy and money to get the case going. On a similar note, I worked for a lady-attorney-HR VP a few years back. On one occasion she instructed the department to "Allow the EEOC access to anything they would like to see. We have nothing to hide. We need to show them that we are perfectly willing to work with them". This resulted in an Easter Egg Hunt Holiday for them and months and months of protracted explanations, depositions and paper exchanges, when, chances are, one perfectly crafted position paper would have dead-ended the charge.

Gillian

It goes both ways Don. A few years ago when I was consulting full time a sexual harassment claim was filed against one of my clients. The state representative who was in charge of the claim asked to review the personnel files of several employees. I reviewed the files and saw nothing of concern in any of them and made arrangements for her to come in and left instructions with the HR rep. While the review was taking place, the outside labor attorney called on another matter and when he found out that a state rep. was looking at the files, he told her to get off the premises. What my client got out of that was a subpoena and a very mad state employee who we then had to deal with. I will stick with my cooperative approach (to a well defined point). It has worked for 35 years with enforcement agencies of many kinds in many different states.

Ruskanen

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 03-28-02 AT 10:34AM (CST)[/font][p]If you are keeping in line with good HR practices, why should you have anything to hide?

Point number two..I found it interesting that you (Don) had identify a previous supervisor as a "lady-attorney-HR VP". If you had worked for a man, would you have identified him as a "gentleman-attorney-HR VP"? I don't think her gender had anything to do with her position or her stance related to the issue.

Don D

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 03-28-02 AT 12:41PM (CST)[/font][p]My point was to show what the decision cost the company, not to hit a snag on the gender of the decision maker. Sorry if that sidetracked the discussion. Down here where I'm from, we often refer to men as gentleman and women as lady. Don