You are not going to believe this one
HRCathy
97 Posts
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 03-08-06 AT 01:23PM (CST)[/font][br][br]One of my employee's was just caught urinating in one of our scrap bins. When confronted, he claims that he has to go to the bathroom more often, because he is diabetic. I am no no notice that he is diabetic, but urinating in the middle of the plant, into a bin that others use, is grounds for termination as far as I am concerned. Can I fire him for this? Or do I now have to accomodate? He has never said anything to me or anyone about needing more bathroom breaks. Help!
Comments
Terminate immediately. I think we all work with diabetics and I have yet to see the disease turn anybody into an idiot.
These "Should I term?" posts are always tough without knowing the company culture and what you have allowed in the past.
Yes, it sounds odd, disgusting, possibly even perverse but I think you should consider any precedents (if that is possible), the ee's work history, his possible motivations, etc.
Maybe he really needed to pee and couldn't make it to a bathroom? Maybe he hates your company and this was a way to express that? Maybe he is a threat to co-workers? I wouldn't rush to judgement.
I think you also need to consider what the impact of termination would be compared to suspension, discipline, etc. What is best for the company?
There are definitely times when immediate termination is the right step to take but even then I think its good to avoid a knee-jerk reaction.
Thank you all for your input. I called on you so I wouldn't make a hasty decision. I felt like it was the right one, but as you all know, running afoul of employment law can come easily if we are not careful.
>
>These "Should I term?" posts are always tough
>without knowing the company culture and what you
>have allowed in the past.
>
>Yes, it sounds odd, disgusting, possibly even
>perverse but I think you should consider any
>precedents (if that is possible), the ee's work
>history, his possible motivations, etc.
>
>Maybe he really needed to pee and couldn't make
>it to a bathroom? Maybe he hates your company
>and this was a way to express that? Maybe he is
>a threat to co-workers? I wouldn't rush to
>judgement.
>
>I think you also need to consider what the
>impact of termination would be compared to
>suspension, discipline, etc. What is best for
>the company?
>
>There are definitely times when immediate
>termination is the right step to take but even
>then I think its good to avoid a knee-jerk
>reaction.
You are right about one thing (knee jerk that is)... I would wait to terminate him after I made him clean it up.
Otherwise, I believe this is exactly the "warm-and-fuzzy psycho babble" beagle was referring to.
What company culture allows public urination????????? It is absolutely laughable and embarrassing to our profession that you would put that much thought into firing someone who pissed on scrap in front of everyone. Should we give him FMLA and send him to the EAP?
This is why CEO's laugh at HR.
The poster has given only a very brief description of this situation but you are ready to term the individual immediately. I find that irresponsible.
Firing someone is a serious act and it should be accorded serious and careful consideration 1) to protect your company and 2) to respect your employees.
When you terminate someone you take away their livelihood and leave a permanent black mark on their employment history. Its not something that should be taken lightly.
There is no harm in suspending the employee until a thorough investigation has been conducted and the appropriate response has been identified.
But that's just me.
p.s. But please note that Mr. Freely's accommodation gambit went nowhere with me.
Just kidding, "terminate" and shoot the sucker while you are at it. He makes all of us look bad!
Just Kidding, what does his supervisor say about all of this time being saved for urinating in the bin verses the toilet?
Yea, you got it right this one is unbelievable and takes the cake for the prize.
PORK
The crazy Kentucky UI Admin Judge awarded him UI, stating we did not have a specific policy prohibiting urination other than in the rest rooms.
He was not diabetic, just lazy and nasty!
Therefore, terminate for indescent exposure and stupidity.
I think your case - it's one thing to have diabetes, but if the employee isn't asking for any type of accommodation or complaining that the bathroom is too far away & that if something isn't done soon, he'll take matters into his own hand PRIOR TO peeing in the scrap pile, then I think it would be really hard for him to muster up sympathy from the unemployment folks. Just be sure to say something to the effect of, "had John Doe not peed in our scrap pile, he would still be working for us..."
Have fun!
Mandi
ps - I just want to be clear - this is absolutely grounds for termination. He didn't ask or in anyway notify your company that he was having issues & so there was no way to have a discussion about POSSIBLE accomodation PRIOR to the incident. He needs to be fired.
Terminate. Now. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.
When people are caught or suspected in some sort of wrong doing, they often lie. In fact, before an investigation of any event, I list the most likely lies in my mind to see if my facts would support that particular story. These employees feel that it is them against the company and they are entitled to take any action, including lying, to keep a job. That "them against the company" attitude is very likely what got them into trouble with their actions in the first place.
We are a fairly small company, so I want to make sure that I am making the right decision when the tough ones come along. It seemed like a straight forward decision to terminate, but then that ADA card was pulled, so I figured I would just check and see what the forum thought. And I am very glad I did.
Thanks!
You mentioned that the ee indicated he was going to talk with his attorney. I hope you will keep us posted on that.
I think some have misunderstood my post but that's ok. The diabetic/ADA aspect is ridiculous. No question.
What I would want to make sure of before terminating is that "peeing in the scrap bin" isn't something that other ee's have done as well. Perhaps you have already determined that. Its unlikely, but sometimes HR doesn't always know what happens on the shop floor.
Again its unlikely, but not totally out of the question that other employee's have done the same thing. Being a guy and spending alot of time with guys I have learned that almost anywhere is a "bathroom" to some people.
If the guy you termed is in a protected class or recently filed a WC claim or something similar, I think he could cause you trouble if he could show that other ee's have done the same thing yet were not disciplined.
Again, its unlikely, but I like to have ALL my ducks in a row before a termination. Its just makes things easier later.
Anyone caught doing the same thing would get the same treatment. Had he not mentioned his illness, I would have been more confident in my decision to terminate.
He made a bad decision to pee there in the first place & then he put his co-workers at potential risk.
Ha...fire the guy and try and forget him.
Reasonable accommodations might include extra bathroom breaks or allowing the ee to wear depends undergarments.
Gives new meaning to the term "peon".
Nice try, but the termination stands.
My $0.02 worth,
The Balloonman