Insurbordinate Terminal Supervisor
HRCalico
582 Posts
I think we have laid out a pretty decent plan, but I can't help but want to run it by the forum.
We have always had difficulty with this supervisor (he's been her 20 years or so). He's a hot head, puts his spin on things, and has some questionable work practices. You'd think he wouldn't have lasted, but we had a very permissive production manager and I won't get into that. It was pre-HR department, and nothing was ever documented, anyway.
Last summer, we had an incident where orders were given to remove naughty pictures (mostly girlie pics, but there were a few male bun shots and the like). Said supervisor told his dept that the president said to remove everything - calendars, family pictures, all of it. Dept was furious at president. Supervisor told president he didn't say that, department said yes he did (you'll see below they wouldn't just sell him out), supervisor was sent home for a day. He received a final (written!) warning for insubordination and improper communication. Actually, he had received another warning in 00 or 01, so there is somewhat of a paper trail.
Currently, we are ramping up our quality standards to be certified much higher than where we are. We're having lots of meetings with everybody to communicate expectations and the like. Last night, the supervisor pulled in our swing shift department and told them that he didn't care what the work instructions said, they were to make a part a certain way (contrary to the instructions). That is the direct opposite of what we should be doing, and could cause us all kinds of problems up to and including having to close the doors and various members of management getting fined and thrown in prison (we're a federal contractor).
We met this morning and have decided to meet with him on Monday (he's out today) and give him the option of resigning or being demoted to an hourly production position. We're basing everything solely on performance issues.
Here's where it gets a little tricky. He went on disability a few years ago for liver cancer, and rumors are flying about that the cancer has returned and he is at the point now where he has to decide whether or not to do chemo. The rumors also say he doesn't want chemo, which means he only has 6-12 months. Further, through his improper communication, he has fostered an "us against them" mentality, especially in his department. We are trying to balance disciplining bad performance with some potentially serious morale reprocussions for firing a 63 year old man with cancer. By that, I don't mean some people will be a little ticked, I mean there is a potential for much of that department to walk out the door, and the rest of the place to stand around and talk about what happened every chance they get.
My thoughts are that the performance issues trump the disability issues - he is not able to perform the supervisory functions of his job. Plus, he hasn't told us anything about his health issues, so we don't really know. I anticipate when we meet with him on Monday, he will spill then, although he may just throw his key on the table and tell us to screw off.
So, if anybody has any further suggestions, I'm all ears. PS - I really do try to not do the War and Peace length posts, but sometimes I just can't help it. Thanks to anybody who weighs in.
We have always had difficulty with this supervisor (he's been her 20 years or so). He's a hot head, puts his spin on things, and has some questionable work practices. You'd think he wouldn't have lasted, but we had a very permissive production manager and I won't get into that. It was pre-HR department, and nothing was ever documented, anyway.
Last summer, we had an incident where orders were given to remove naughty pictures (mostly girlie pics, but there were a few male bun shots and the like). Said supervisor told his dept that the president said to remove everything - calendars, family pictures, all of it. Dept was furious at president. Supervisor told president he didn't say that, department said yes he did (you'll see below they wouldn't just sell him out), supervisor was sent home for a day. He received a final (written!) warning for insubordination and improper communication. Actually, he had received another warning in 00 or 01, so there is somewhat of a paper trail.
Currently, we are ramping up our quality standards to be certified much higher than where we are. We're having lots of meetings with everybody to communicate expectations and the like. Last night, the supervisor pulled in our swing shift department and told them that he didn't care what the work instructions said, they were to make a part a certain way (contrary to the instructions). That is the direct opposite of what we should be doing, and could cause us all kinds of problems up to and including having to close the doors and various members of management getting fined and thrown in prison (we're a federal contractor).
We met this morning and have decided to meet with him on Monday (he's out today) and give him the option of resigning or being demoted to an hourly production position. We're basing everything solely on performance issues.
Here's where it gets a little tricky. He went on disability a few years ago for liver cancer, and rumors are flying about that the cancer has returned and he is at the point now where he has to decide whether or not to do chemo. The rumors also say he doesn't want chemo, which means he only has 6-12 months. Further, through his improper communication, he has fostered an "us against them" mentality, especially in his department. We are trying to balance disciplining bad performance with some potentially serious morale reprocussions for firing a 63 year old man with cancer. By that, I don't mean some people will be a little ticked, I mean there is a potential for much of that department to walk out the door, and the rest of the place to stand around and talk about what happened every chance they get.
My thoughts are that the performance issues trump the disability issues - he is not able to perform the supervisory functions of his job. Plus, he hasn't told us anything about his health issues, so we don't really know. I anticipate when we meet with him on Monday, he will spill then, although he may just throw his key on the table and tell us to screw off.
So, if anybody has any further suggestions, I'm all ears. PS - I really do try to not do the War and Peace length posts, but sometimes I just can't help it. Thanks to anybody who weighs in.
Comments
In no uncertain terms, the whole department could be told the downside just as you have explained it here. Closing the plant and landing folks in jail is serious business. Were I in that department, I would not want to jeopardize my job because my supervisor was 'tilting at windmills.'
I also think the health issues are not a consideration at this point. I would not even get to prepared to respond to them, other than brushing up on the appropriate steps to take if he does bring this up.
"Appropriate steps" - reasonable accomodations, FMLA, etc.? Can you expand on that a little?
The appropriate steps I was referring to, are associated with FML considerations. You do not have those issues at this point, in fact, unless he has notified someone in management that he may need FML, those steps would happen after that.
But the timing of your termination would trump this possible FML situation. As others have noted, FML is not meant to protect the bad EE.
As to your possible walk-out - good riddance. It might even be a good idea to fire the guy, call a departmental meeting and tell all of the co-conspitators that this sort of behavior stops now.
If anyone wants to bite the hand that feeds them, tell them to go bite some other company. You are here to do the company's business as best you can, fund your payroll, pay your bills and make a profit, yada yada yada. The point is, get in the ship or walk the plank, their choice.
Take the liver issues and chemo crap out of the equation as it matters not. Focus on his inability to perform his job duties and pattern of disruptive behavior and walk him out the door. I might be persuaded (and right know my attitude towards this is skewed) to offer a severance in consideration of an executed release and covenant not to sue, but that is only my gut feel at this very second.
Gene
You might want to rethink your option of demoting him. Just from what you've told us, it doesn't sound like the misconduct will go away. But you know your situation better than I do.
I suspect, although I'm not familiar with his department, that you will not experience a walkout. They "follow" him because he's their supervisor. As soon as he's not, they cease to follow him; especially if he's headed out the door and out of a job.
My two cents: terminate; ignore any physical issues you haven't been informed of by the employee BEFORE the meeting; don't worry about the possible exodus of employees.
In our situation A the employee was terminated and another more senior supervisor had a meeting with employees to clarify company policies and a "from this day forward" attitude. Most employees were glad he was gone, though we dealt with some attitude issues for a bit. There was no exodus beyond our normal turnover in that department.
In situation B we were dealing with a very small close department that had been working together for 10-20 years. Long term employee periodically drank on the job and evidently it was known, tolerated and covered by co-workers until there was a major dept personnel issue and in the fallout we received an annonymous letter. We started watching and documenting. There was no ADA/FMLA discussion. He was soon caught drinking on the job; performance termination for cause. He was well-liked, but was also a walking liability for various reasons. (We are also a federal contractor.) The only others who left were one termination and one resignation from the personnel issue mentioned above. He died shortly thereafter from alcohol-related problems and many went to his funeral. The new reorganized department is doing beautifully.
The disability does not come into play as you have no knowledge of a disability.
The new version of the story not only doesn't identify any "wrong-doing", but shows the supervisor was working with some issues in his department to get good, quality parts turned out. (Helping the EEs understand properties of the materials, things they need to watch for to avoid scrap.)
So, we're back to wait-and-see on his health. For his sake, I really hope he retires and enjoys the time he has left.
Seems like there is quite a bit of work to do with respect to cleaning up communication lines. Misinformation can be grounds for termination. Look at all you were/are about to do based on it. Perhaps more investigation will give you a third version or corroborate one that you already have.
Is this like an accident in an intersection with witnesses on all the corners. AFter interviewing, none of them appear to have seen the same accident?
You have a quest for clarity to determine what is going on. Lots of mystery to clear up.
Yes, marc, we do have a lot of cleaning up to do as it is. You don't know the half! :>) We've been working on it for a while. I really believe it all started 12 years ago when our president came out from California to take over the business. He was never accepted, and in combination with he's a little shy and is known to choose his words poorly on occasion (etc. - but he is a nice guy and he really does mean well), you have 12 years worth of us against them, fostered and encouraged by the above-mentioned manager who never controlled the supervisor who is the subject of this post OR documented much against him. Our president is just starting to see the level of the manager's lack of support - it's kind of sad, since he was so trusted for so long.
I don't think so. Even if the last thing he did MAY have been positive/helpful, you still have a problem on your hands that isn't going away.
"Hot head...puts his spin on things... questionable work practices...
insubordination...improper communication..'us against them'..." You are looking at ongoing problems, and not meaning to be cynical, he isn't going to mellow if he gets a cancer diagnosis. We had this in scenario A mentioned in my earlier post. We got an outside mediator in for him and his supervisor and had several sessions with him one on one training on supervision, dealing with people, company philosophy, etc. He negatively effected the entire dept, just as yours is and as has been said before: ignore anything re the physical that you didn't hear from him, investigate whatever you need to, but don't "wait and see". He's poison in that department, minute by minute.
Additionally, while we are NOT allowing this to drive our decisions, we are also considering the community impact in how we handle things. We're located in a town of 3,000 people in the middle of nowhere. Of course our side of the story won't be out because of confidentiality issues, but we don't want to be known for s***-canning a 63 YO man dying of cancer, to put it bluntly.
Of course best case would have been for the original production manager to never have tolerated this behavior!
"From an outside perspective it looks like you have an organization that does not and will not deal with its problems."
As much as that stings, it's true regarding some of our problems - not just this one. Terminating this "problem employee" would be one step to dealing with our problems, but it would also create new problems. We've been working for over a year (well, since I got there, really) on fixing things. Maybe we aren't doing it right, but I'm trying to be patient as things don't change overnight.