Restraining Order and Nepotism

SENOJ

A female employee called in to her supervisor after not reporting to work to say that she would not be in to work because she was at the local police station filing a complaint against her husband who became violent at home. Her husband is an employee of the company as well. She showed up at work the next day and so did the sheriff with a restraining order and summons to court for the husband. We learned of the facts surrounding the restraining order the next morning. The female employee is on vacation due to return in a few days. What are our obligations, by law, to her, him and other employees. The restraining order is alleging that he threatened her at gun point and made her and their children leave the home. She says that she is not afraid of him at work but she is asking the police to have him removed from their home. At least one other employee has expressed her concern to management that she is afraid of him because she has seen his wrath off work during a non-work related party that the couple had at their home in the summer. Are we creating a hostile environment for other employees? We are located in Tennessee.

AluminumBoy

You could get into all kinds of HR mumbo jumbo on this. Actually, mumbo jumbo isn't the right terminology since this is very serious and there are lots of laws that deal with this situation. In my response, I'm sure I'll open myself to substantial rebuttal.

I would get rid of the gun weilding husband...as long as there is substance to the allegations. (Do you have good reason, or proof to believe he's a nut job?)If you do, can him.

I would say that his behavior outside of work has clearly impacted his ability to do his job. His co-workers are probably terrified of him.

I think the company should be aggressive and deal with him. I think it sends the right message...the only message...that our employees MUST feel safe here. Don't let legal issues slow you down with something this serious. Of course, I'd recommend being smart in your approach and feel that by doing so, you can shield yourself from any liability.

1. Is the female employee a good employee? Are there issues surrounding her?
2. Is the husband a white guy under 40?
3. Was he arrested for his actions?
4. Have there been other incidents with either of these folks?
5. How has the husband reacted, to date?

Fight your way through the mumbo jumbo, fire this guy, make it stick, and create a peaceful environment where the employer did the RIGHT thing, not the mumbo jumbo thing. Good luck with this tough situation.

marc

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 03-15-04 AT 11:10AM (CST)[/font][br][br]The only problem I have with Aluminumboy's suggestion is with timing. TRO's can be issued with little or no proof and are good for 10 days. The are ordinarily accompanied by a motion to make the TRO permanent, which lasts for 3 years (I think). With the permanent restraining order, there is a hearing and evidence is presented. This allows both parties to have their case heard, and if the situation warrants, the Restraining Order is granted. Then at least you have some eveidence that the judiciary agrees that a restraining order is necessary. That keeps you in the position of presuming innocense until proven guilty.

In the meantime, keeping a safe workplace may take some extra effort. Perhaps a suspension with pay for the hubby until things settle out in the hearing. Just a thought.

rad

OSHA requires you to provide a safe working environment for your employees. That includes protecting them in domestic violence situations. There was recently a situation in Mass where a husband and wife worked together, she had a restraining order against him for the home only (she did not want to jeopardize his job)and he stabbed her to death at work. Very sad, left three children without a mother.

Shadowfax

I just can't agree with AlumB - at least not yet. You don't give us much infor re the restraining order, what does it restrain and where? I thin k the co places itself in needless jeopardy bytaking any precipitate action aginst his job. Any fear of the other employees is pure speculation, heck, even wife isn't afraid of him at work. There appears to be nowork related basis whatsoever to let him go. Wven if he is at will, there may be lia bility if you let him go over this. You probably need to be sure they are not near one another in the shop (depends on the RO) and I'd be sure someone keeps a surer eye on things that otherwise, maybe talk with him and let him know he can't klet private issues come into the shop,but w/o more info, and more ebvidence of actual fear or imminent danger, I would not do a thing.

deniseE

Depending on the type of facility you have, you can make this work....

we have a pair here with a restraining order in effect. Since we have a secure building (you have to have electronic acess to go anywhere in the building) we were able to shut off their access to each other. Since they have no business need for communicating, we've banned all telephone and email contact...in addition to personal contact. Any violation would result in immediate termination. So far, so good.

I'm not sure what we would have done if they worked in the same department or had a business need to attend meetings together or something.

AluminumBoy

Other employees are expressing fear.

Gun point??? and we're discussing this???

If there is merit to this, get him out. Safety is about reducing risk. Do you wait to guard your machinery until an arm is lopped off.

People who threaten with guns do not have a place in my Company, regardless of the liability that comes with it. The tail cannot wag the dog.

Carey

I have to agree with AluminumBoy. Employees are not protected for illegal activity outside of work. The company would be acting on the good faith belief that he was violent and since his intended victim is an employee, they have the duty to protect her and other employees who might get caught in the crossfire. I'd take the risk and defend whatever claim he might bring in order to keep everybody else safe. It's a better position to be defending than why you didn't fire him because he hadn't done anything at work yet.

SMace

What if you fire the guy and because of that he snaps and comes in and shoots up the company. I don't think we have enough details to give the "right" answer and there may not be one. You have to tread carefully and quickly and look at all angles and make the best decision for the company. I would talk to an attorney now.

marc

Have none of you ever ran across and EE that made the whole thing up? I am all for keeping the workplace safe. That's why I suggest a paid suspension while things are sorted out in the judicial system.

I have had experience with a situation where the female EE filed police reports about her spouse beating her up and got the TRO. When it came time to prove her case, evidence was presented that proved her injuries were self-inflicted. Seems the husband had cut off her drug money.

mwild31

I'm with Shadowfax here - for my own reasons, I too just can't fully agree with Alumboy on this issue.

Agreed, safety is the priority, but safety goes two ways. Let's say as the company, you did fire this guy & the information in the restraining order was accurate - could this guy potentially come back to work & shoot people at work because he thinks the co. took her side? Could the guy become so off-balance by the firing, blame the wife & this time not threaten to shoot her, but actually do it? Too many what-ifs in this scary situation. First, contact your attorney, let them know what's happening & get suggestions for the best course of action. My approach to this would be as neutral as possible - in the hopes of not escalating the situation. Sounds like the gal has said she feels safe at work, so bring the guy in and let him know the company is aware of the situation and he's now on a 'tight leash' (if you will). Let him know it's his responsibility to keep this stuff out of work & to work with his wife in a very professional manner, meaning no retaliation or hostile work environments (make sure to say this to the gal too - I'm too cynical not to have the thought cross my mind that she has the restraining order just because she got to the court house first). Next, reiterate the company's policy on workplace violence and let them both know that there will be zero tolerance. As to the rest of the company, I would tell folks that it's none of their business & if they do feel threatened to report the threats to the HR department & HR will investigate the activity mentioned in the complaint(s).

AluminumBoy

Very good point. I do think you must substatiate whether there is merit to the claims. I like the idea of a paid suspension to sort out the facts.

However, if there is merit to the claim, I would feel safer protecting my property from someone who has been terminated, than from a loose cannon who is in our workplace everyday. Certainly, this depends on the level of security that is in place at a given facility.

Qualified shrinks are good in these firings (or even if he is not fired).

I don't have any stats to back this up, but it seems that the majority of people who go postal in their workplace are still employed there. Surely, some terminated folks come back.

System

Input from your attorney is a good idea. I think a referral to the company's EAP would be helpful. You would get an additional and objective appraisal of this guy and the situation. Paid suspension would be fair, too, because you are not penalizing this guy, you're merely separating the two parties. Please let us know how this turns out!

Whatever

The problem with the paid suspension is that it means the company is taking sides and sending a message as to who it believes. Check with an attorney. Also, the supervisors should be aware that there is a restraining order and what the terms are.