THE INDUSTRY ADVISOR![]()
Industrys four costliest
disciplinary problems involve absenteeism, wasted time, substance abuse and pilfering, and
there are as many approaches to making and enforcing work policies as there are companies. Personally, I believe that the fairest work policies are the ones
that allow employees to discipline themselves when they have demonstrated undesirable
behavior which extends even to the point of terminating themselves. I also hasten
to add that there are not and cannot be "fair" policies on anything, to
everyone, all the time. No matter how good the policy, someone, some day, will claim that
it is "unfair."
Management always has struggled to find a judicious way to establish and enforce fair rules of employee conduct. The objectives are vital and non-controversial: to promote the health and safety of all employees; protect company property; ensure steady production; conform to legal requirements; and create a pleasant working environment. But basic philosophies and methods for achieving these goals often are at issue.
Would positive results best be achieved by letting employees know all the possible rules and the penalties for violating them? Or should rules be sketched "once over lightly," to avoid projecting an image of treating employees as if they are potential delinquents, or immature individuals without the "sense" to know the basic rules of industrial behavior?
Astute labor lawyers usually will advise their clients to detail disciplinary matters and associated punishments on paper. Their argument is two-fold. First, with a written copy of the rules, employees can determine if they are receiving fair and impartial treatment; and second, employers can protect themselves from doling out hefty settlements in court. Most labor dispute cases are lost when there are no written policies or documentation of policy infringements to support managements position.
Managers who condone a relaxed approach to discipline are setting themselves up for legal disasters. This type of manager may argue that employees constantly barraged by "dos" and "donts" will feel as if they are being treated like children, and therefore have less incentive to act like adults.
Though commendable in intent, the relaxing of rules and formal punishments usually has proved to be the wrong prescription for positively influencing a work force. Evidence has shown that when management fails to apply punitive measures, its behavior is interpreted as a sign of weakness by employees.
Such a management style provides a go-ahead signal for that minority group of plant dissidents (who are present in all companies) to lie down on the job and even to organize a corps of anti-company followers who have no regard for the concept of a fair days work. Furthermore, the absence of written statements, covering various violations and their respective punishments, conveys the message to workers that management and supervision might overlook irresponsible acts.
In the sensitive area of employee discipline, management can learn much from educators and child development experts. Basically, the lesson is to avoid the extremes. Firmness and fairness must go hand in hand. While not tied down by rigid rules and regulations, employees must know that there are limits on personal expression and behavior, and realize that they are not just individuals, but also members of a group. Employees must understand fully the reasons for the limits placed on their freedom. Also, they must know the consequences of disobeying the rules, and be convinced that the employer will not allow them to get away with breaking the rules.
The written rules should not sound confrontational, but instead reflect that they were written with employees welfare in mind. However, wording should not be apologetic. Nor should it be of a general or ambiguous nature. To learn more about properly written policies and procedures refer to our Policy and Procedures Manual. State the rule, state the punishment, period. Poorly written behavioral guidelines generally intensify employee belligerence and tend to breed offenders.
The fairest disciplinary systems usually "grade" employees by penalizing them for their accumulated rule infractions rather than for single acts, and offenses typically are graded according to their seriousness. To remind employees of the seriousness of even the most minor infraction, however, management should keep a written record of all infractions (including verbal warnings or discussions about rule infractions) and tell employees: "All infractions become part of a written record in your employee file." In todays litigation climate, these written records are the best defense against that smiling employee who one day may sue you and your company.
Be aware: The ways employees break company rules always will vary. Thus, a prescribed set of corresponding penalties never will be comprehensive; and a predetermined rule can be alternately too harsh or too lenient, depending on who violates it and under what circumstances. No matter how long your list of rules, exceptions always will occur, and need to be handled on a case-by-case basis.
Finally, a good plan should provide a means for employees to erase penalty points from their records, through good behavior, at a specified rate. In Tables 1 and 2 that follow, I have provided some examples of factory rules and the various associated penalties in two different formats. Note that the seriousness of the infraction and the number of times the same offense occurs govern the degree of punishment . . .
TABLE 1
BASIC RULES, REGULATIONS AND PENALTIES
To obtain the highly informative balance of this valuable, timely and authoritative paper there is a small recompense fee of $10.00 payable by credit card – using our secure server. Upon notification of your payment, the ENTIRE PAPER will be E-mailed to you. |
Copyright © 2010 Gene Levine Associates, All Rights Reserved