Disciplinary forms

[pixieb]

What is the name of your state? MN

I supervised an employee with a history of job performance issues that I was asked to document. . .which I did, with e-mails, meeting minutes, and notes. Issues included changing her hours without approval, punctuality, communication, professionalism--the list goes on. Then I was told to "write her up" which I did with the assistance of my direct supervisor. This was a final write-up, last step before termination, since she had been written up by a previous supervisor. She took the form several levels up when she found ONE date that was inaccurate and accused us of falsifying information about her. As a result, the Director to whom she spoke told us that we could not write her up, nothing could go in her file, she was claiming a hostile work environment, and basically she's now a "protected class."

I know at least some of this info from the Director is false: this employee is NOT a member of a protected class. Here's my question: on a disciplinary form, can revisions be made after the employee looks at it? Further, can the form go in her file unsigned as evidence of poor job performance? The Director says that we would "lose" in a court of law if this employee were terminated and went to the civil rights committee. Any thoughts?

 

[seniorjudge]

Q: Here's my question: on a disciplinary form, can revisions be made after the employee looks at it?

A: Sure, as long as the employee agrees and gets to see it, etc. like the first one.



Q: Further, can the form go in her file unsigned as evidence of poor job performance?

A: Unsigned forms are worthless.



Q: Any thoughts?

A: About what?

 

[mlane58]

this employee is NOT a member of a protected class.

The employee most certainly is a member of a protected class----we all are.

Here's my question: on a disciplinary form, can revisions be made after the employee looks at it?

That's up to your organization.

Further, can the form go in her file unsigned as evidence of poor job performance?

Again that's up to your organization.

The Director says that we would "lose" in a court of law if this employee were terminated and went to the civil rights committee.

You haven't provided enough information to make a solid opinion as to whether it would or not.

 

[pixieb]

protected class

My understanding of Protected Class, from research I've done, is that to establish that status there must be clear bias based on gender, race, religion, or sexual orientation. Is that accurate?

In this case of the scenario I posed, the employee is claiming a hostile work environment because her Ownership form and the associated metrics have been changed to be more specific and measureable, her teaching schedule has changed because of her limited availability having to do with her daycare issues. Again, I'm not an expert, but the reading I've done seems to suggest that in a"hostile" environment there must be a pattern of harassment. Is this accurate?

 

[cbg]

What you seem to be misunderstanding is that protected characteristics take in everyone.

It is just as illegal to fire someone for being male as it is to fire them for being female.

It is just as illegal to fire someone for being Caucasion as it is to fire them for being Hispanic or Asian.

It is just as illegal to fire someone because they are of English descent as it is to fire someone for being of Arab descent.

For some reason, many people think that only minorities are covered by Title VII. That is not true. ALL of us are.

Every single person on earth has a gender, a race and a national origin. Therefore, every single person on earth has at least three protected characteristics.

BTW, sexual orientation is NOT protected under Federal law, though it is under the laws of quite a few states.

 

[pixieb]

Protected class

Thank you for the clarification on that. It raises another question: Is an employee in a protected class--i.e. all of us--protected from all disciplinary action because of that protected status? Or, does the protected class status come into play only if there is perceived discrimination or harmful treatment of the employee that specifically arises from that status?

 

[cbg]

Disciplinary action taken as a result of a protected characteristic is prohibited by law.

You cannot discipline her or treat her differently BECAUSE she is female, over 40, French, German, Asian, Christian, Jewish, black, white, hispanic, whatever.

Since, however, every individual on the planet has at least three protected characteristics (I hesitate to use the term, protected class, since that term is legally meaningless), obviously a person with a protected characteristic CAN be disciplined. They simply cannot be disciplined BECAUSE OF that characteristic.

It doesn't matter if harm comes to the individual or not. Discipline BECAUSE OF a protected characteristic is a violation of the law.