With the obvious exception of compensation and benefits, the administration of discipline is probably the single most important dimension of the employment relationship. Legally, Illinois is an employment-at-will state, leaving the employer enormous discretion in the imposition of discipline, including termination of employment. That said, arbitrary and unfair imposition of discipline – even if legal – can have dramatic, adverse consequences for the employer.
For many employers, their largest investment is in the training and development of their employees. Typically, a productive employee likes his or her work, derives self-worth from his or her work, and looks forward to coming to work. This investment can be quickly undone with poorly executed discipline. Inaction in response to unacceptable behavior can be very discouraging for those employees working hard for the employer and may lead to poor morale.
Discipline is not and should never be the goal. Discipline is a tool to help the employer produce a happy, productive workforce.
The development of a policy for employee discipline should not start with the punishment that the employer might impose for various offenses. Rather, the employer should start by identifying what it wants to encourage and then, by identifying what it wants to discourage or prohibit. Some of the prohibitions are obvious: unexcused absences, theft, substance abuse, etc. Articulating the values the employer may want to encourage is more subtle: respect for co-workers, hygiene, appropriate use of computer time, etc. Articulating the company’s values and expectations for supervisors and managers may have to be quite detailed and should probably be re-enforced in the written job description for the position.
Example - Does the supervisor or manager understand that his or her job performance is based, in part, on how well he or she evaluates subordinates’ performance and how well the supervisor imposes discipline?
The employer should think through what it wants to reward and what it wants to discourage and then communicate these thoughts. The imposition of discipline should never be a surprise to the employee. A well-developed policy that is implemented correctly should almost always result in an employee acknowledging that he or she knew better. Granted, that acknowledgement will not always happen, but if the documentation is in place, it will be evident to any third party looking at the documents that the employee should have expected some level of discipline.
Finally, the disciplinary policy and the administration of discipline should be perceived as fair from the perspective of the disciplined employee and his or her co-workers. This goal requires the employer to be mindful of:
There are no specific “legal” requirements with respect to a disciplinary program. It does not have to be in writing. It does not have to be progressive. Because Illinois is an employment “at-will” state, the employer can, if it wants, fire an employee for any reason that does not constitute illegal discrimination or retaliation. But if the employer wants to build a relationship with the employee that is premised on mutual respect and a commitment to improvement in job performance, it is recommended that the employer adopt a discipline policy that is progressive and carefully stated in writing.
Almost all of the prohibitions on illegal discrimination – disability, age, gender, pregnancy, sexual orientation, marital status, genetic information, religion, national origin or ethnicity, race, receipt of workers’ compensation benefits, concerted work activity, whistleblower, etc. – are triggered by an “adverse employment action.” The vast majority of claims for illegal discrimination charge that the discipline imposed by the employer was the adverse employment action. Thus, the imposition of discipline should be imposed in a way that reduces the chance that the discipline will be perceived as an adverse employment action motivated by an impermissible or illegal motive.
For the vast majority of employers, the starting point for a disciplinary policy should be a progressive written discipline policy. Such a policy gives the employee several chances to improve his or her performance with increasingly severe penalties with each failure. With each level of discipline, the goal is to educate the employee on what is being done incorrectly to motivate the employee to do better. Administered effectively, such a policy helps to manage the legal risks that arise from charges of illegal discrimination.
Even with a progressive disciplinary policy, however, the employer should communicate in writing that, both:
The following are some examples of misconduct that the employer might want to identify as warranting immediate termination if established as true to the satisfaction of the employer:
Through the progressive disciplinary process, the employer should outline the discipline process that may occur with violations of a less severe nature.
Example - The first violation may result in a verbal warning, the second in a more severe penalty such as probation or a written warning, the third in suspension and – finally – termination.
A progressive discipline policy makes employees responsible for individual violations, but also seeks to identify and correct patterns of misbehavior.
The challenge with a progressive disciplinary policy is to make it clearly understood to employees while at the same time retaining the flexibility as an employer not to be bound to offer the employee the full range of steps. The disciplinary policy should not be a contract with the employee but should instead be understood as guidance for the employer and the employee on how discipline may be imposed. It is true that with less discretion retained to the employer, consistent penalties are more likely to be imposed which is very desirable, especially when defending a charge of illegal discrimination. At the same time, there are often circumstances surrounding the offense that suggest that a more or less severe penalty than usual might be appropriate. The written policy should retain for the employer the ability to exercise that discretion with the obligation resting with the employer to be able to explain why the penalty is different than what might normally be imposed for the offense.
The following are some examples of misconduct that the employer might want to identify as warranting discipline in the progressive policy:
One of the highest values that an employer should stress in its company is safety. This value must be reinforced in the discipline policy.
Unsafe conduct at work must be disciplined. There may be some actions for particular employers that are so unsafe that immediate termination is warranted; perhaps failing to tie off when working at substantial heights. Normally, however, safety violations should fall into the progressive discipline process, verbal warning, written warning, etc. This point is true even when the unsafe conduct results in an injury to the employee who was acting in an unsafe manner. The concern arises that disciplining the employee who caused him or herself a work-related injury will be perceived as some form of disability discrimination or illegal discrimination against a workers’ compensation claimant. The employer needs to weigh that risk against the importance of reinforcing the perception in the work force that the commitment of the employer to safety is complete and thorough. Suffice to say, the authors think the safety considerations always prevail.
When crafting and then applying the policy, the employer should be mindful that it does not want its discipline program to discourage the reporting of unsafe working conditions. Towards this end, it may want to consider an amnesty type feature for those who self-report safety violations, at least for the first self-report.
As discussed in Discrimination, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects concerted activity, that is, employees discussing terms and conditions of employment. Conferences, e-mails, and chats that look to the employer like time wasters and performance problems can quickly be cast as concerted activity with the goal of employees trying to improve their work situation. Employers should be careful to focus on the when and where of this issue and not the substance of what was being done or spoken to avoid a charge of inhibiting concerted activity.
The relationship and sometimes the lack of a relationship between poor job performance and discipline is something that needs to be considered by the employer as it administers its discipline policy. Evaluations of job performance should be ongoing and not prompted by a specific episode of conduct as happens with discipline. At the same time, poor job performance may be the result of conduct that warrants some level of discipline.
Consider two clerical employees who both have low productivity. One employee’s lack of productivity is because he or she spends too much time on social networks and emailing friends. The second employee’s lack of productivity is because he or she does not understand the work. Eventually, if not corrected, the poor performances should result in termination, often regarded as a disciplinary step. While the outcome may be the same, the process for the two is different.
With the first employee, the performance is due to conduct that the employee can control, social networking. Discipline may be an appropriate tool to induce the first employee to change his or her conduct.
With the second employee, the poor performance appears to be from a lack of ability or training. The challenge is how to improve performance given the lack of training or ability. With the second employee, education and training should be the focus, with identifiable performance benchmarks stated in writing by which both the employer and the employee can see any improvement.
One of the most consistent shortcomings of performance evaluations is the unwillingness of the supervisor to assess accurately the performance of workers. It is the rare supervisor or manager who does not contribute to grade inflation awarding “exceeds expectations” to workers who are actually performing substantially below that level. This inflation is understandable because it is natural for supervisors to want to be liked by their employees; however, it is more likely to happen because supervisors do not look at performance evaluations through the lens of discipline. More times than not, poor performance is the result of conduct that violates an expectation or rule of the employer that the employee can change. Employers should be mindful that discipline can be used as a tool to improve performance, as well as to keep the peace.
Documentation should begin before the need for disciplinary action becomes apparent. Supervisors, managers, human resource employees – anyone responsible for the conduct of others – are encouraged to maintain on a regular basis a log that documents very briefly, by date, those matters that the supervisor or manager thinks might be worth remembering. These written notes have several purposes:
If, after reviewing the log or record, the employer concludes that some level of discipline is justified, the employers must keep organized, written records of the disciplinary action taken. Every act of discipline taken against an employee needs to be documented and placed in the employee’s disciplinary file, including verbal warnings (a “verbal warning“ is “verbal” in name only and also needs to be stated in writing with a copy given to the employee).
All disciplinary records should be accurate, detailed, and objective. If the employer ever needs to defend itself against a claim of discrimination, the employee’s personnel file is often an effective means of convincing a judge or jury that the company’s decision to discipline an employee was based on legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons.
As soon as problems develop, a supervisor should discuss them specifically with the employee and suggest ways of correcting the situation. Any such discussions should be documented and kept in the employee’s file. Copies of oral and written warnings should also be placed in the personnel file, and the supervisor should notify the employee of the employer’s expectations in order to avoid further discipline or termination, including a time-frame for correction if applicable. Disciplinary action should be taken as quickly as possible following misconduct in order to avoid suspicion of an improper motive for disciplinary action, and the discipline taken should be documented accordingly.
Once misconduct is suspected, the employee’s supervisor or another management official should immediately begin an investigation. If negative consequences result from the misbehavior, then action should be taken to correct them in order to minimize the impact of the misconduct. The initial investigation should yield enough information to conduct a more thorough investigation.
The employee suspected of misconduct should be interviewed as soon as possible after the alleged misconduct. The interview should be conducted in private, away from other employees. If possible, the supervisor should have another supervisor present to later corroborate the investigator’s account of the conversation. The employee should be given an opportunity to explain what happened, including the chance to identify all witnesses the employee believes would have information relevant to the investigation. At the close of the interview, the investigator should inform the employee that someone will contact him or her after the investigation is complete. If the suspected behavior is serious, the employer may wish to consider suspending the employee, with or without pay, while the investigation is ongoing.
After interviewing the employee, the investigator should interview all other witnesses who may have knowledge of the facts. Again, these interviews should take place as soon as possible. The interviews should be conducted separately and in private. The investigator may wish to take signed statements from all witnesses. The investigator should encourage the witnesses and co-workers not to discuss the subject matter with anyone.
Before making any decision to terminate, the employer should consider the state and federal laws prohibiting discrimination and retaliation (see Discrimination) and evaluate whether the decision could trigger an employment discrimination or retaliation claim. The employer should take into account:
At the close of the investigation, the information gathered should be reviewed by the personnel department or management staff. Any files that shed light on how similar misconduct by other employees was treated in the past should also be examined. To aid in this process, the company may wish to institute a recordkeeping system that has a separate file for each company rule or policy.
If disciplinary action is to be taken, the supervisor should place everything in writing to serve as a record. The record should describe:
All decisions regarding severe disciplinary action should be approved by the personnel director or some other appropriate management official in order to ensure the adequacy of the investigation and the fairness of the disciplinary action to be taken.
Once a final decision is made, the employee should be allowed to review the company’s written account of the incident. The employee should understand the nature of the offense, the company rules the offense violated, the nature of the disciplinary action, and finally what action the company will take if there is another violation of company rules. The employee also should sign the disciplinary action record presented to the employee, the purpose of which is to verify that the employee saw the document.
Some companies may want to provide employees with a right to appeal any discipline decision more severe than a written warning. This appeal should be to a management official who had no involvement in the investigation or discipline process. If a company chooses to allow appeals, the employee should be given a reasonable time in which to give written notice of appeal to the appointed management official.
In general, verbal warnings should be given for relatively minor violations of the company rules. A supervisor should speak to the employee in private with another supervisor present (who can later verify what transpired). The employee should also be informed that future infractions will result in further discipline. Documentation that the verbal warning was given should be kept in the employee’s file and provide a copy to the employee.
If the employee disregards a verbal warning or if the violation is more severe than that which would warrant a verbal warning, a written warning may be in order. A supervisor should discuss the warning with the employee to ensure that the employee understands the reasons for the disciplinary action. A copy of the warning should be given to the employee at the time of the discussion and the employee should be asked to sign and date the warning, acknowledging its receipt. The original warning should be kept in the employee’s file.
Suspension is a form of discipline usually administered only for severe infractions of the rules or for excessive violations after at least one written warning. Some employers may not wish to use suspensions since they are very public and can be humiliating to the employee. As a result, some companies may prefer to use probation instead of suspension but both should be considered as the equivalent of a “final warning” with termination of employment as the next action if matters do not improve. Because of the gravity of suspension or probation, the employer should confirm either that the offense warrants such a level of discipline, or prior verbal and written warnings have not produced the change in behavior the employer wants.