Fraternizing with fellow employees
Cannon
9 Posts
Problem: I have a male salaried employee staying past "normal" buisness hours to "catch up" on work and a female hourly employee that works in our call center (2 hrs after normal hours) to catch pacific coast orders. There are two hourly employees in the call center during these two hours. One of them leaves the call center every day from between 30 minutes to 1 1/2 hours. She goes to the other side of the building to "chat" with the salaried employee leaving the other hourly employee to take all the incoming calls. I have investigated this situation and confirmed that this is in fact taking place. The hourly employee will be dealt with according to our policy regarding leaving worksite on company time. A "courtesy conversation" was given to the salaried employee two years ago about this same type of activity. Documentation indicates "if improvement is not seen in this area that disciplinary action will be taken."
I am just wanting some feedback on how some of you would handle a situation like this.
Thanks for your input.
I am just wanting some feedback on how some of you would handle a situation like this.
Thanks for your input.
Comments
The exempt EE is violating the letter of the earlier write-up.
Discipline should follow - and while termination is a strong step, it would be defendable.
The salaried employee is not leaving his work station and he is there "after hours" so whatever he does during those hours is hardly relevant. (Not completely irrelevant, but he isn't violating any company policy that you know of).
The hourly employee needs to be written up for leaving her work station. Warned that if she does it again, she can and will received disciplinary action up to immediate termination.
The salaried employee was previously warned of what? Talking to other employees after his work hours? Distracting other workers? I am sure he is not discouraging the young lady from coming to see him, however I have failed to see what evidence you have against him that he has violated company policy. Maybe if you could provide more details as to why he needs disciplinary action.
No one wants to stop business conversation, nor any of the other conversations that help promote teamwork, but the behavior described in the original post was obviously over the top. Shirking her duty for a 1/2 hour to 1 1/2 hours every night is not acceptable.
I've read far too many posts where people come here with a personnel problem they need help with and the typical answer they get is FIRE THEM!
Just fire them. Why bother disciplining them, it will only happen again. Just fire them.
Not only does that not help the poster develop their skills in HR to handle such situations it doesn't help the employee become a better asset to the company.
They are just going to find another job at another company and six months from now a new HR person is going to be typing the same question regarding the same person b/c nobody took the time to coach them into becoming a better employee.
Yes, she is wrong, Yes, he is wrong - but what do you gain from just firing them?
Maybe I am a rare individual when it comes to this, but my whole theroy is: If I am going to take the time to interview people to hire them, I'm going to take the time to make sure they are the employee I was expecting them to be. Now in a company of size, which I do work for a rather large company, that may just be wishful thinking - but I'm going to at least put a little effort into it to try to resolve the problem - not just get rid of it.
And the poster who asked for help is at least showing that she wants to find a resolution to her problem and not "just fire them". Otherwise, they would have already done so.
just kidding JM...
#1 thing a consultant shouldn't say: "I could tell you the answer right now, but we're committed to a three month project..." #-o
The approach to develop people is a good one and it is one I prefer to use.
That said, there are situations where stronger measures are in order. The exempt person who has already been written up for the same type of behavior is ready for the next step in discipline. After already being written up, we normally have a final warning, but that depends on the severity of the infraction(s) and the attitude of the EE. Also, I generally expect more from an exempt EE than a non-exempt. I probably could not defend that statement very well unless the exempt EE was in management, then my expectations are much higher.
The non-exempt EE is taking advantage of a situation - loose or no supervision for that evening shift. The company is partly to blame for not having mechanisms in place to monitor evening shift production and be able to pinpoint the problem.
In our shop, we have a strong belief in individual work ethic - we do our best to select individuals who can demonstrate this quality. The person who knowlingly shirks his/her duty and places that burden on others is one who will select themselves out of our company, but we do not terminate before we have made sure that;
1. The person has the right training,
2. The person has the right tools for the job,
3. The person has good direction/mentoring, and
4. The work environment is structured for success.
If the company has done all of that, and the EE is still failing, then the EE is the one with issues. After progressive discipline steps are taken, without notable change in results, the EE must move on to find a better fit.
The hourly employee is a different matter. I always make it clear to hourly employees that a little visiting is ok, but anything more than a few minutes occassionally is basically stealing from the company. That employee would enter the 1st step of our disciplinary process. However, having said that it probably wouldn't have happened here in the first place. We don't allow hourly employees to work without an exempt supervisor.
I am curious. I thought 2 years was a long time, but apparently it is not long enough. So, how long is long enough? #-o
As for him, true he is exempt. However, he got his courtesy warning. I would give a written warning advising that if it happens again, he will be fired.