Grievance Policy
beentoblackbird
1 Post
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 03-11-02 AT 06:12PM (CST)[/font][p]I am a board member of a non profit organization in which a member has filed a grievance against another member. Specifically, the current treasurer found some accounting irregularities in the former treasurers' books. Because the irregularities were so blatant and went on for over a four year period the current treasurer felt it her responsibility to address the matter. After approaching the president and being told "let's not drudge up the past" the current treasurer exercised her right and filed a grievance against the former treasurer for specific funds to be returned to the organization. Once the grievance was filed the president could and did try to resolve it at her level.
The president's resolution was not accepted by the grieving party and thus the grievance was appealed to the executive board. After extensive research the executive board ruled in favor of the grieving party and requested that monies be returned to the organization. The grieving party accepted the board resolution however the party being grieved against did not.
At this point what rights does the party being grieved against have? It appears as if this procedure could go on and on if in fact both parties have rights of appeal.
What are general grievance procedures in a non-union environment given the facts stated above?
In what type of situations is a grievance procedure used as opposed to something else?
The president's resolution was not accepted by the grieving party and thus the grievance was appealed to the executive board. After extensive research the executive board ruled in favor of the grieving party and requested that monies be returned to the organization. The grieving party accepted the board resolution however the party being grieved against did not.
At this point what rights does the party being grieved against have? It appears as if this procedure could go on and on if in fact both parties have rights of appeal.
What are general grievance procedures in a non-union environment given the facts stated above?
In what type of situations is a grievance procedure used as opposed to something else?
Comments
You didn't mention the area of grievance, so I'm going to assume this is a personal issue vs. a formal harassment situation within the workplace. If it's the latter, then the employer would certainly step in to investigate. Even if this occurs, I would not permit any attorneys to be involved in resolving your company issue. If the resolution process doesn't satisfy both parties, they can always proceed with EEOC or other legal actions and you would normally involve legal counsel at that time. Keep the attorneys out of this for as long as it's an internal employer/employee matter. Good luck......
Certainly I would include grievable issues that are related to protected rights, e.g., non-discrimination (this could include sexual harassment or any perceived discriminatory treatment), or the higher level review of decisions that affect legal rights, e.g., denial of FMLA, or the level of reasonable accommodation under ADA, retaliation for "whistleblowing."
You may want to allow the grievance mechanism to deal with implementation of pay and benefit (e.g., an employee believes he or she is being underpaid, and has not received appropriate satisfaction/explanation from "Payroll.")
You then may need to include discretionary-type acts and decisions. Discipline, overtime, work assignments, etc. fall under this.
You may want to, on the other hand, spell out the types of issues that aren't grievable instead of identifying the issues that are.
Part of what type of greivance procedure you have is whether or not you have an "open door" policy that would allow an emplyee not only to "informally" discuss a concern or problem with his or her supevisor but with any manager in the chain of command (and thus being able to bypass the supervisor).
Remember, there are a couple of purposes grievances serve...1) to help employee morale, and to prevent "pressures" from building that could seriously disrupt the chain of command, the authority of a supervisor, the work environment. 2) The ability of management to identify problems and effectiveness of lower level supervisors and managers and to address them early on. For example, grievances can help identify to upper management what type and where particular training is needed.
In terms of time limits, 10 days to file from first notice of act or decision is common, but 5 days is not unusual. While many procedures are three steps, they don't have to be, and of course, depending on the level of employee involved may only be two steps. I have no problem with the person, such as the supervisor, who made the decision being one of the levels -- it allows for the decision maker to review and correct the matter before it gets to a higher level.
Whether you wnat ot have the grievance procedure culminate in the chain of command's senior manager or in a "greivance committee of managers" of some kind is "six of one and half a dozen of the other." Both have positive and negative aspects.
Having said all that, I suggest you develop a standard form with some requirements for the employee to provide specificity as much as possible as to the issue to be grieved. You want to hold the employee to some standards, but allow supervision and management some flexibility in responding -- don't require them to spell out a justificaiton for a "denial." A "grant" would probably be worked out in a settlement.
Whether you want some type of in person "hearing" or a paper review is really open. Somewhere along the line a chance for the employee to meet with a decision-maker to explain in more detail his or her side makes sense, though.
The real consideration for a grievance procedure is whether or not employees will perceive it to be fair, or at least reasonable.