Refusal to sign written warnings

Richard S · August 2003

Question that has bothered me for a long time is what to do with employees that refuse to sign a written warning, even if it means that they are only acknowledging that they recieved it or read it. I know my personal thoughts, but I would like to know how others handle that and does it require a seperate written policy. There is no pressing problem here, just curious.

clarkbar · August 2003

We don't have a written policy about this. The supervisor merely indicates on the warning that the employee refused to sign. The supervisor then signs and dates the warning. I was told in a seminar once that if the employee refuses to sign, ask them to write on the warning: "I refuse to sign this warning." Then ask them to sign and date that they refused to sign. That's one way of getting their signature. x}>

POPEYE · August 2003

We ask our supervisors/managers to document on the original warning that the EE read the warning but refused to sign. We also require that another supervisor or member of Mgmt be a witness and sign the refusal statement.

Crout · August 2003

It's essentially meaningless whether they sign the discipline or not. We simply have the supervisor document that the EE was given the discipline and refused to sign, which is also signed by all witnesses. We do not have a policy that compels the EE to sign.

System · August 2003

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-21-03 AT 09:04AM (CST)[/font][p]We would note on the warning that employee refused to sign and try to get the employee to sign that. I know there are others who would treat this as insubordination and would terminate if they don't sign. I guess it all depends on your company culture, and probably your state law as far as how the courts view that kind of action.

Don D · August 2003

Agree with most but don't think we can compel one to sign anything and don't think we can successfully terminate as insubordinate if they do not sign. Agree that signature is virtually meaningless other than to certify receipt. Many union employees will not even sign acknowledgement of having received a copy of a policy. So be it. Get other signers to certify delivery and move on.

System · August 2003

Don D,
I have heard from some of my peers that the reason they consider it insubordination is because an employee, by refusing to sign, is refusing to honor the terms of the warning. They have had legal support for doing so. In fact, some indicate they will terminate for insubordination if an employee refuses to sign the employee handbook notice. I guess that practice fits their culture. I would never do so here, agreeing with you that in the long run it doesn't matter and why set that kind of precedence. But it is interesting to learn about such diverse practices and views concerning HR topics.

Balloonman · August 2003

I always get a chuckle when someone refuses to sign a warning. However if during new hire orientation some refused to sign that they have received the employee handbook, I think I would strongly consider ending the employment relationship right then and there. I think that tells you they are going to be a high maintainence problematic employee. Same if they do not want to provide a ssn.
I can see though how someone disagreeing with discipline would think that not signing would actually mean something.
My $0.02 worth.
DJ The Balloonman

Parabeagle · August 2003

Our employee warning form includes the language above the signature line that the employee's refusal to sign in no way excuses them their obligation to abide by the terms of corrective action outlined in the warning, so they're on notice that they have to comply with the warning regardless. Then the supervisor just writes "employee refused to sign."

Leslie · August 2003

We just have the supervisor note that the employee refused to sign. However if they disagree their failure to sign negates any further action. Per Policy:

"Employees are requested to agree/disagree, comment if desired, and sign the warning notice...The warning notice will be forwarded to human resources where those marked disagree will be researched. If the employee refuses to sign, the warning notice will go forward with such note and no further consideration will be given."

I've got a million of 'em...

Don D · August 2003

blj3837: I think it's highly unlikely that any of our peers has terminated an employee for insubordination under this scenario AND GOTTEN AN ATTORNEY TO CONCUR WITH THAT ANALYSIS. We cannot compel anyone to affix their signature to anything other than the legal documents they must sign upon hire. These would be W2, State Tax Forms, Insurance Forms, Application, I-9 and possibly one or two others. Refusal to sign those things stops the machinery. It is a condition of employment that those be signed in order to proceed with the employment relationship. Signatures on all these other things merely facilitates our processes (proving something later in a hearing); refusal doesn't stop the machinery. And in these refusal cases, although a bit more of a hassle for us, signatures of others will suffice. Terminating as insubordinate one who refuses to sign something laid before them will likely lose you the unemployment case in all 50 states, will certainly lose you an arbitration hearing should you have one and will probably not win for you in an unfair labor practices or discharge hearing of any sort. So, I find no possible value in the 'insubordination termination' scenario, other than temporary euphoria.

System · August 2003

Well, if you wander on over to the SHRM HR Talk Board, you'll meet several HR posters who have indicated taking just such an action.

Additionally, when we had someone who refused to sign (this was a first for us), I contacted our employment attorney who said yes, we could terminate for insubordination. We decided not to because of our company culture and setting a precedent. That was not a step I wanted to take.

Don D · August 2003

I see. Perhaps that attorney will represent you free gratis at the UI hearing and arbitration and any other venue where the insubordination firing is challenged. My guess is he won't return your calls.

System · August 2003

Don D,
Let me clarify - we are not union, so I agree that I have no idea if it's even possible in a union environment (firing for not signing a warning). I also don't know about Unemployment Insurance as I never investigated that. I also want to clarify that I wouldn't recommend doing this, but just stating that I do know of HR professionals at other companies who have done this and apparently not been sued or successfully defended suits against this practice.

Crout · August 2003

Which sub-heading is it under in HR Talk? I'd love to read those posts because I think the insubordination argument is pretty weak and Don is correct that it would never stand scrutiny in arbitration or a UC hearing.

System · August 2003

Hi Crout,
These postings are under a variety of sub-headings - all in the General HR bulletin board. You'll find them under topics where posters ask about employees who refuse to sign the employee handbook receipt acknowledgement and other posts that ask about employees refusing to sign warnings. You may find some of them if you do a search.

rabs · August 2003

We have a spot next to the signature line that reads "Witness if employee refuses to sign". Just note it on the page! Good luck.

ljault · August 2003

In the two decades I've been in HR I've used a trick that often works with employees who refuse to sign a written warning. I ask them to write somewhere on the page, "I have read this document, but I disagree with it and refuse to sign it." and sign their name and the date. Then I invite them to submit their rebuttal in writing. You'd surprised how many employees will do this. Then at least you have documentation that it was reviewed with them.

NancyJ · August 2003

I advise the employee that if they don't sign, we must go through the whole thing again, with a witness. Ususally that gets them to sign (usually with a diatribe). If not,simply bring in a witness, go through the entire speech again, ask them again to sign, and if they won't, have the witness sign for them right then and there.

Unfortunately, not obtaining their signature creates problems if you wind up in court - its your word against theirs that they were given the warning.

POPEYE · August 2003

NancyJ, Welcome to the forum. You will find as you scan the posts and the responses that you will be overwhelmed with advice, some very good and some not quite as good. Here is a little tidbit of advice that I have for you. I think you will find it very beneficial to ALWAYS have a witness present during any type of disciplinary meeting. You will be protecting yourself or any supervisor or manager that conducts the meeting by having a witness there. I know it has sure saved my tail several times. Our sups know that not having a witness in a disciplinary meeting is grounds for their own discipline.

HRQ · August 2003

A few months ago during a UI appeal hearing, the former employee insisted she'd never been given the documented warning signed by the supervisor and a witness. They'd written "refused to sign" in the employee section.

Ultimately we lost because we termed her for doing something against policy but turned out to be an accepted practice at her location. I learned it was accepted practice DURING the hearing. You can bet the supervisor heard about that one. (I didn't bring her with me, as she tends to get defensive.)

LindaS · August 2003

We are a union facility and as such, any disciplinary actions allow the employees to elect union representation present at the meeting (they always elect this). The employees typically refuse to sign (why not I have no idea) but the supervisor and union rep. sign as witnesses so it really doesn't matter whether or not the employee signs the form. A copy of the warning is provided to the union and a copy is placed in the employee's file (the employee is also offered a copy but usually refuse).

As far as a separate policy regarding this issue, I don't see where that is necessary as long as you have a witness to the discipline who can verify what was said, and that the warning was acutally given to the employee.

Nat · August 2003

My suggestion and what we do is to have another management person witness that the employee refuses to sign. We get them to actually write on the form, "employee rufused to sign" and sign it. You should always have a witness (not necessarily for discipline but always for a termination) and it should always be another management person not a co-worker of the one being disciplined.

Crout · August 2003

I must say, that Forum on the SHRM site pales in comparison to this one.

Dutch2 · August 2003

We are non-union. We also take the stance that if the employee refuses to sign, we get the supervisor's supervisor to set in on the second round and we repeat the whole session. If they refuse to sign the second time, we have the two manangment personnel both sign and date the document and state that the employee in question refused to sign the form. Normally by bringing in a "big gun" from the upper management team, the employee becomes much more willing to cooporate. However, if they still refuse to sign I too have asked them to please write on the document that they refuse to sign and why or at least initial and date the form emphasising that the two supervisors will note on the form that the document was presented to you on this date.
Good luck,
Dutch2

sonny · August 2003

In what regard Crout?

Richard S · August 2003

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-25-03 AT 01:38PM (CST)[/font][p]As usual you folks have great ideas. I am sitting here thinking that maybe I should add a line to the warning that says something like "Warning Administered by" or "Delivered by" then "Witnessed By". That may be the answer. What do you think?

Refusal to sign written warnings

Comments