HRGuru

How does your company structure its warning to termination policy? Does general wording about "first step is verbal warning, second is first written, third is final written, last step termination" provide good guideline or develop a formal policy that can't be amended very easily. Example: if an employee gets so upset during a conversation that he/she tells his/her coworker to "f* off" is that really just a verbal warning?

 I gotta tell ya, if I hire and invest in an employee, my first concern is retaining them. We do something similar to your step process while aiming to get to the root of the issue. Some issues are non- negotiable, of course. If you violate the tardy policy long enough or get caught stealing, you're gone. But often times, I find behavior problems are simply a symptom of an underlying issue. It' my job to find out what is going on, correct the company's shortcoming, gain agreement with the ee and move forward with follow up. I find that most often I can avoid termination by focusing on the ee's engagement. When it boils down to a recurring issue without the ee demonstrating consistent and sustained improvement, then yes, they are provided ample warning before the proverbial hammer swings down. Err in favor of the ee, do everything you can to correct the issue and termination is your last lien of defense. Sadly, sometimes, staff just have to go in order to maintain a healthy organization.

The disciplinary structure is good, but sometimes you have to venture outside the structure.  Human Resources issues are never black and white and there is always some grey area that must be analyzed.  I like to start with verbal warnings and then proceed to written, final written and then termination.  Also, I use unpaid suspensions if I see that the employee can be turned around without temrinating them. 

Progressive discipline is always advised, but of course, there are offenses that are grounds for immediate termination.  When the organization is unioned, you can guarantee that if an employee is disciplined without using progressive discipline, the union will grieve what ever discipline is administered.  I think, two verbal warnings for the same offense (except for those that are grounds for immediate dismissal) is common.  I do believe though that during that first verbal counseling, it should be more of an honest and open dialogue to find out what, if anything is wrong.  Most managers are quick to discipline and don't realize that something could be going on to cause the employees sudden change of behavior.  A verbal though, is just that.  Verbals should only be documented in the manager's file, not something submitted to HR.  The verbals help the manager comfortably move to the next level discipline, when necessary. 

I think it should look like this: verbal, 2nd Verbal, 1st written warning, 2nd written warning, final written warning with suspension, termination. 

Here is a question, if an employee received a final written warning (FWW) four years ago (for whatever reason) and now has to be disciplined again (let's say verbal altercation with another employee), would you terminate knowing that the employee already has a FWW in his/her file, or do you reissue another FWW b/c of the length of time since the last one.  Should there be a statue of limitation? 

Either step by step procedure or management discretion should not be used alone.  We practice counselling ,written warning maximum three and then suspension pending enquiry . An impartial enquiry is always helpful . It will  provide solid support for the  management . On the other hand it is done so that  no one  can   play  whimsically with an employee.

hawkeye says ...

Interesting topic.  I am a little concerned about what reaches an employee's file.  We would keep suspensions on file but not final written warning - that would remain with management.  Suspension also has a statutory limitation of 2 years and then it is removed.  There are situations in which the step by step process from verbal to written would not exist such as dishonesty in application, misrepresentation and fraud.  Then, it would go straight to termination.  Respect for others and the organization is an important value which would follow the process others have mentioned.  I wonder about what is kept in an HR employee file - is it common to have that on the HR file, or is it kept by the manager in your organizations.  Since employees have rights to view their employee file - the written warning in the file would be a concern.

Can you clarify why you would be concerned with a written warning placed in an employee file.  It shouldn't be a concern because a written warning must be shared with and signed by the employee and therefore it would be no suprise to the employee that there is a written warning in his/her file.  

Too many bites at the apple......  The progressive disciplinary policies I develop have a verbal, written warning, and then either a final warning with suspension or a final warning without a suspension depending on the severity of the offense.  It also includes ability to accelerate and go straight to termination for offenses that warrant it.  Some offenses, like violence-related issues don't even get one bite of the apple.

A verbal warning in my book is a verbal warning to the employee consisting of an open dialogue about the incident, why it was wrong, why it should never happen again, and the employee's commitment to following the policy.  This is documented by a summary email or note to the employee.  Just because we say it is a verbal warning doesn't mean we don't keep records.  The email/note is simplified statement advising the employee that they have received a verbal counseling, been informed of policy, and thanks them for their commitment to sustained and immediately improved performance.  A "written" warning really refers to a formal document where intimate details of the incident(s) leading to the discipline are recorded along with formal notification and acknowledgment by the offending employee of what policy is/was//and will be and the consequences of any furhter infractions.

All documents go in the master P-file in HR, including the manager's notes on the incident that caused the verbal warning.  Employees have a right to see a personnel file, but most states restrict that right and only enable an employee to see documents which contain their signature.  They do not have full "discovery" rights.  HR professionals should review a P-file before it is handed over to the employee and if necessary seek legal counsel on what can or can't be seen by the employee.  Give only what the law requires and this helps set a defense to make the "road to a lawsuit" more difficult for an employee to file.  

In the time I have been in HR.  I have won 17 of 10 cases in front of the CA labor board.  I have had one EEOC complaint, and I have never had an employee file suit on any employee relations matter I have handled.  I have also cleaned up several messes created before me or in other areas of the company where I did not have initial control.    Honestly, the best defense for a lawsuit is excellent record keeping, tight controls over no records being anywhere but in HR, and all performance metrics are measured and kept, the good and the bad.  If all you have is a disciplinary process, you have a weakness in defense.  Your employer will look mean and derogatory always derisive of employees.  Not good in front of an opposing counsel or a jury.  You need recognition comments on jobs well done that are also placed in the P-file.  This creates balance, credibility, and a solid defense about fairness and good-faith, which are the major tenets for which employers are sued. 

And don't be scared!  On over a dozen occassions I have had my counsel and I meet with the opposing counsel and the plaintiff and have showed them the complete personnel file, everything.   When you do the job right and you have good procedures, policies, and actually follow them, this works well.  Each time the opposing counsel has either dropped the case then and there or has never filed.  Any good attorney works on a contingency.  They don't get paid unless they win.  If you show them the odds of winning are low and it will be a very difficult trial they will stop wasting their time and move on to a suit that has a higher probability of winning.

The nice part about this is there is room for a variety of approaches depending upon the style of the company and the HR personnel.  I won't agree that there is only one right way to set this up.   What works for me and the types of companies I service may not be the best for other companies.    Many of my clients are a mess when they hire me, so there are some very strong measures I employ to bring things in line quickly.  

One thing about documentation and record keeping skills, it something you always keep teaching and reminding everyone about.