Discrimination? HELP!

dcastaneda

I have a difficult situation and would like some input on how this can be handled/defused.
At a staff meeting, the president of our company answered questions the EE had raised one in particular about bring a child into work after school for the last hour of the day; there is one EE that has done this everyday for at least the 3 years I have worked there. He replied with a basically non-commital statement, "I really don't have a problem with it as long as the child is not disruptive to anyone", then followed it up with "it is up to the descretion of each program director." We have are a non-profit org with a staff of 23, all considered full-time professional (another issue in itself) and for the most part, all program directors but one are ok with this. This one director has allowed one EE to bring his child in the office almost everyday after school but when one of the other individuals under her supervision brought her 9 yr son in after school one day, she made it clear to that EE that she should not bring her son in and if after school care could not be arranged on those days needed, she is to take vacation time off. Several months later when this EE again brought her son in due to a unexpected circumstance, this director inquired if this is going to be a daily event. The director then put a personal note in this EE personal file stating that this EE was told that she should not be bringing her child in and that the director felt this was an act of insubordination as the EE did not respect he feelings.

Does anyone have any suggestions? Is this discrimination? Could any legal issues result? What do I do?

ray a

Not much action today, so I'll put in my 2 cents. It does seem discriminatory. This director allows one ee the benefit of bringing in their child but not another. If one can do it, then all should be able to do it. But, the bigger concern would be allowing it to happen at all. What if a child is injured, what is your liability? I would stop the practice completely.

dcastaneda

I would love to but it has the blessings of the powers-that-be and unfortunately I have been employed the shortest period of time so my knowledge of what can result in legal issues is not taken to seriously.

JM in ATL

Well, it sounds like regardless, you will not be able to change this... so, what I would do is speak with the manager who lets one do it and not the other, that this could be looked at as discrimination from an ee's perspective. Go on to explain the reasons why. The man can but the woman can't or the one race person can, but the other race person can't. Help him/her see why this is not a fair practice.

Although the one person may have been doing it for eons and it is a part of that persons work arrangements, perks like that need to be made available to all if they are going to be done.

I would then document this conversation. Send a memo to the mngr recapping the conversation and keep it on file.

That way, if this ever does turn into a discrim. case, you have the documentation to back up the fact that you tried to resolve/prevent the situation and that you personnally can not be held liable or responsible for a law suit. Although, as unfortunate and unfair as it may be, you probably will be held responsible anyway.

Gee, that statement was just a ray of sunshine, now wasn't it? Good luck and I hope it all works out for the best.

Parabeagle

The biggest problem I see may not be discrimination, but it definitely smacks of preferential treatment for one employee over another. If the employee who is not being permitted to bring her child in happens to belong to a protected class, I'd say you have real trouble.

Someone (preferably the director's supervisor) is going to have to have a chat with the director and find out why it's OK for one of her employees to bring her child in, but not the other. At a minimum, if discipline results from this I think you could face a real problem from a morale standpoint (the other employees can't be blind to what's happening).

rad

Its a fine line to discrimination here. I've seen this type of thing in several variations. One that comes to mind is male employee who leaves early for the kid's soccer game is a devoted father, when mom does it, she's not committed to the job. Folks seem to have more sympathy for dads who are dealing with such issues as child care and single parenting. I agree with previous poster, get rid of the practice altogether. It will undoubtably create hard feelings for a while but in the long run its just not good practice to have children in the workplace on a regular basis.

HRsage

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 10-07-03 AT 02:20PM (CST)[/font][p]What logical reason is the supervisor using to allow one ee to bring in their child and not another ee? And I gather from your post that the one allowed to bring in the child is male and the one not allowed is female. That could cause bigger problems as Parabeagle pointed out.

The Supervisor of the program director definitely needs to step in and find out why this is going on and put a stop to it before things get worse. I agree with Ray that the whole practice of allowing children is questionable. The preferrential treatment needs to stop and ultimately so should the day-care.

ray a

Good catch, HRsage. I didn't pick up on the man getting the perk and the woman is not allowed the perk. Double trouble.

Rockie

I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would allow children in the workplace unless it is an extreme circumstance. No matter how "good" they are, children still get bored and out of sorts and create disruption.

That being said, if one is allowed to bring a child in, then everyone should be allowed to. Is this discrimination...perhaps....is the one that is not allowed to bring the child in a part of a protected class? In that case, discrimination might be a question for a jury to decide. If not discrimination, then certainly a bad employment practice to allow some to have this type "perk" and not others.

Dasher

Gee, we do seem to face the same issues, huh? We went through this a couple of years ago, which resulted in a new policy about Children in the Workplace. I would be happy to share it with you. Sometimes parents really do have to bring a child in. We are a small family-focused company and really did not want to eliminate it entirely. However, there are some children who can not be restrained (actually parents who can't parent) and were disruptive. Then there are some children who are a complete joy to have visit and you would not even know they are here. I believe our policy addresses both in a fair manner.

dcastaneda

I would love to have a copy. My fax# is 423-265-9832.

I really have appreciated the comments, it seems we all have the same thoughts on this.

marc

I would also like a copy please. Fax is 775 856-6208, email is
[email]mnicolet@childrenscabinet.org[/email].

Thanks in advance.

mwild31

From the post, I really don't see any legal issues, but then if your truly concerned, contact your employment lawyer. I don't think what you have described is discriminatory (after all, there's really no protected class issue here) as much as I think this is what happens when you have weak leadership at the top. A wishy-washy answer from the President, got him off the hook, but now it comes down to an inconsistent practice within the company, whereby one employee brings in a child, faces no disciplinary action because their director is much more lenient and the other employee does. This is a policy destined to create conflict, low morale and simple discontent. Go back to the President and outline the pros/cons of his statement & see if he will reconsider his stance. Good luck!

marc

While discrimination may not be an issue, preferential treatment could be. If your scenario evolves to the point where the ee being disciplined for bringing the child to work is terminated. Then where are you? Do you have a greivance procedure? Could this be a wrongful discharge? I don't know, but asking the question now instead of in the courts might save you a lot of trouble.

MEssig

The big problem here as I see it, is the over-reaction by the program director in labeling the issue as "insubordinate behavior." Like it or not, sometimes working parents find themselves in a bind. If the child is unruly, talk to the parent individually, discuss the solution, and what should happen if they find themselves in a bind (go home, bring the child,). The idea that she stuck a "note" in the personnel file is ridiculous. There are far bigger issues to deal with, and I would venture to guess the program director is awful to work for. The good news is that the note speaks for itself - is sure isn't flattering to the author.

Yes kids can be irritating, and mine are grown, but I still remember the 4-5 times in my career when I was faced with a child-care dilemma. Nothing is worse than cringing, not knowing what to do, if you go home your employer is angry, if you bring your child in, the employer is angry. Have a heart - apply a bit of humanity in these situations.

ritaanz

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 10-08-03 AT 04:41PM (CST)[/font][p]I'm sitting here and reading your post and the responces that followed. I cannot,in any way, come up with any logical explanation why He can bring his child to work and SHE cannot. Question: Does HIS child look like the program director?

marc

Hmmmmm. Maybe we should tie this into the employee fraternizing at work discussions. Another downside, or is it upside? I get so confused.

scottorr

The female employee can claim sexual discrimination, the director is allowing a male to bring in a child but not allowing a female to do so. I am sure a jury would just love to hear that. By the director putting a note in her file she just gave the employee documented proof! Take action before she does or you wont stand a chance in court.

Brad Forrister

The best recourse might be to get a clarification from the president as to whether the individual program directors have the authority to make different rules for different people, or if they are just being given the authority to make different rules that would apply uniformly to everyone in their division.

Brad Forrister
Director of Publishing
M. Lee Smith Publishers