Legal Definiton of a Supervisor?

[Dregnaw]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? WA
What is the legal definition of a supervisor? Or, manager? Am I responsible for an employee if I don't have hire, fire, discipline rights?

Based on the statement provided by the National Labor Relations Act, a supervisor is to have certain rights or duties. If I do not have them, then am I responsible for the actions of employees? I would say that I should not as then the burden of responsibility could be considered unreasonable.

I was written up for the actions of an employee that I clearly have proof of training, and they have seen that proof, but the employee continued to conduct the work wrong. The company has elected to discipline me and not the individual. However I have been told several times that I do not have the right to.

 

[FlyingRon]

What are you really after? We're not going to write books on all the hypothetical things that might happen (even limiting to NLRB actions).

 

[cbg]

Neither statute nor case law provides a hard and fast definition of a supervisor, or spells out, "If the employee does not do x y and z they are not a supervisor". There is no such definition in law. If your union provides such a definition, then you'll need to take it up with them. Otherwise, there is no law you can invoke that will force the employer to discipline the employee and not you, or stop disciplining you. If they hold you responsible for the employee's lack of performance, there is nothing in the law that is going to stop them.

 

[latigo]

Neither statute nor case law provides a hard and fast definition of a supervisor, or spells out, . . . ".

Not so! The NLRA specifically "spells out" the definition of the term "supervisor"; to-wit:


"The term 'supervisor' means any individual having authority, in the interest of the employer, to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or responsibility to direct them, or to adjust their grievances, or effectively to recommend such action, if in connection with the foregoing the exercise of such authority is not of a merely routine or clerical nature, but requires the use of independent judgment." [29 USC §152(11)].

 

[cbg]

That still leaves a WHOLE lot of room for individual definitions.

 

[tranquility]

If one were to go to google scholar and search federal cases with the string "29 USC §152(11)", one might find 401 cases that further defines what is meant by the words. (Actually, less. Not every one describes the term--they just use it.)

Edit:
Including 16 from the Supreme Court.

 

[Zigner]

Not that it matters...the OP wasn't illegally disciplined.

 

[cbg]

The OP's problem is that no law says he has to be a supervisor before the employer can hold him responsible for the other employee's failure. If they believe his training/coaching/whathaveyou was inadequate, he doesn't have to be above the other employee in the reporting chain for them to take action.

 

[latigo]

That still leaves a WHOLE lot of room for individual definitions.

So . . . . ?

Then how about a word defining a person's reluctance to admit that they were mistaken?

To commit err ain't a mortal sin! If it were, and being more often wrong than right, I'd be long excommunicated, tarred and feathered and deported.

Incidentally, there are numerous federal court decisions, including several from the United States Supreme Court construing an individual's status as either that of employee or supervisor as defined by the NLRA.

Making not one, but two errors that you can now refuse to admit to.

Maybe if you keep going, you'll catch up with me.

 

[Stephen1]

Reminds me of a previous subordinate. One day he decided that I wasn't qualified to be his supervisor so then he didn't have to listen to me or follow my direction. My supervisor attempted to set him straight. It was a civil service position so lots of hoops to jump through to get rid of him, but we did.

 

[LeeHarveyBlotto]

So . . . . ?

Then how about a word defining a person's reluctance to admit that they were mistaken?

To commit err ain't a mortal sin! If it were, and being more often wrong than right, I'd be long excommunicated, tarred and feathered and deported.

Incidentally, there are numerous federal court decisions, including several from the United States Supreme Court construing an individual's status as either that of employee or supervisor as defined by the NLRA.

Making not one, but two errors that you can now refuse to admit to.

Maybe if you keep going, you'll catch up with me.

Is that any better or worse than answering the narrow question that does the person asking no good whatsoever?

 

[cbg]

Sorry, I meant to respond to this sooner but work happened.

I will acknowledge that the NLRB has provided an extremely broad definition of the word, supervisor (although nothing much more than one could find in Websters) if you will acknowledge that, with the limited exception of the Executive Exemption under the FLSA, that definition is more or less meaningless with regards to employment law, and has no relevance whatsoever to the question the OP is really asking.

 

[tranquility]

The Supreme Court has repeatedly said the definition is "precisely defined" and it is important to the OP as, if he is a supervisor, the Act regarding unfair labor practices does not apply to him. While on the surface it does not seem there is anything related to an unfair labor practice going on here, we have a very abbreviated set of facts that are presented in a confusing way. If all the employee is asking is can he be written up for farkeling, then as long as farkeling is not reporting something that would be protected by something like a whistleblower statute, then the answer is yes. An employer in an at-will state can take an adverse action for any reason but a prohibited one.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Ultimately, they can fire you or write you up, regardless in most states absent a CBA or contract.

 

[tranquility]

Ultimately, they can fire you or write you up, regardless in most states absent a CBA or contract.

Would a CBA apply to the OP?

(Hint, guess what it might depend upon.)