Workplace situation handling and resolution strategies

Business - Human Resources

VERMILLION COUNTERTOP COMPANY CASE STUDY Advisable Action by Vermillion Human Resources:

The most advisable action initiated by Vermillion was its immediate Human Resources department response to the conflict between Sally Smithens and Raj Shivji, including the suspension of Ms. Smithens. Whereas Shivji's conduct with respect to Sally could have been professionally inappropriate or constituted sexual harassment with liability implications for Vermillion, it did not pose a physical threat of violence in the workplace.

On the other hand, Sally's response was violent and potentially dangerous to the health, safety, and physical welfare of another Vermillion employee. Moreover, a legitimate question arises in connection with the accurate characterization of Raj's gesture; either way, it did not threaten the physical safety of another worker. In the worst case scenario, Raj's conduct could require training from human resources in the area of distinguishing appropriate and inappropriate conduct in the workplace.

Inadvisable Action by Vermillion Human Resources:

The least advisable action initiated by Vermillion was its delegation of authority to respond to a serious human resources issue relating to the inappropriate and potentially dangerous conduct between coworkers to a human resources representative who had no previous experience or responsibility in the area of resolving such issues. The fact that Ms. Sampson burst out laughing at an insensitive comment by one employee directed to the employee with whom that employee had just had an altercation illustrates the inadvisability of allowing an inexperienced human resources representative to handle such a situation. Ms. Sampson also misunderstood the applicability of the search policy. Suggested Course of Human Resources Action:

1. Improper Assignment of Human Resources Responsibility

As the head of Human Resources, I would have handled the situation myself instead of allowing Ms. Sampson to conduct the interviews and inquiries. An individual whose experience is limited to processing payroll, calculating benefits, and hiring workers should never have been assigned to respond to this type of situation. By bursting out in laughter in response to an insulting comment by Raj toward Sally, Ms. Sampson violated the crucial element of neutrality.

Furthermore, since a legitimate question does exist as to whether or not Raj's explanation for the meaning of his gesture was completely truthful (in light of the objective input from Don Carter about the gesture), I would have been very careful not to give Raj any indication that I condoned inappropriate sexual harassment in the workplace.

In fact, I might have conducted some personal research into the accuracy and truthfulness of Raj's explanation by researching hand gestures common to his culture.

Nowadays, the availability of the Internet provides resources capable of settling this issue definitively by distinguishing an innocent misunderstanding from outright sexually inappropriate behavior. Certainly, I would have been much more careful to maintain a neutral posture until I was able to determine the truth of the hand gesture.

If my independent research disclosed that the gesture made by Raj was indeed a recognized gesture that is devoid of sexual connotations in his culture, I would not have authorized the language pertaining to his conduct toward female employees. However, I would counsel Raj to be more aware of potential cultural difference in order to avoid future misunderstandings of this nature. Of course, if my independent research disclosed that Raj's explanation was likely untrue and that both Sally's and Don's perceptions were most likely accurate, then I would have authorized the same language that was used in the letter of reprimand issued to Raj pertaining to his conduct toward female coworkers in the workplace.

2. "Policy Statement-Searches"

As the head of Human Resources, I would never have allowed the implementation of a policy that probably violates fundamental elements of privacy in the workplace.

Certainly, appropriate site security policies designed to redress the theft issue may include the prohibition on bags and lunch boxes in the high-security "lockout" areas.

However, searches of employees' clothing and person are excessive responses to that concern. The fact that one employee already pursued a violation-of-privacy claim against the company arising from this policy would have suggested to me that the search policy would have prompted me to revise this policy assuming it was already in effect.

In that regard, as head of Human Resources, I would have provided appropriate training to all human resources personnel to ensure that they understand that the posted policy statement concerning searches was limited to searches directly related to the theft issue. With proper training, no human resources employee would ever confuse the applicability of that policy by suggesting to an employee that it justifies personal searches for other purposes.

If a human resources employee had reasonable concerns that a company employee could be concealing weapons on her person or in her personal effects in the workplace, I would have instructed the human resources employee to terminate the offending employee for cause. If the suspicion about concealed weapons was not sufficient to warrant termination, I would have instructed the human resources employee to counsel the employee about the issue.

Allowing an employee who poses a legitimate risk of injuring other employees with concealed weapons to remain in the company presents a serious liability issue in the event that employee subsequently harms another employee with any weapon, including those that may not be readily discoverable through permissible searches. Conversely, subjecting employees to mandatory searches of their person or personal effects would pose a liability issue in connection with violation of personal privacy rights in the workplace.

3. Alternate Methods of Preventing the Concealment of Weapons

As head of human resources, if I believed there was a legitimate concern about concealed weapons in the workplace since the incident between Sally and Raj, I would implement uniform procedures that apply equally to all employees. Instead of establishing a random search policy (either in connection with the theft problem or in connection with the violence issue), I would have installed metal detectors at the employee entrance and required all persons entering and exiting the premises to subject to screening in this manner.

In addition to being less invasive, the fact that all personnel are routinely screened in this manner without any decision-making on the part of the company as to which employees must be subjected to searches and under what circumstances, substantially decreases the potential liability for claims of personal privacy violations. Such a system would, therefore, be preferable to any policy that allows company personnel to exercise independent authority over the decision to conduct searches of specific employees without specific cause to suspect a justification for particular searches.

4. Improper Human Resource Personnel Training

All Human Resources personnel must be properly trained. Specifically, they must be trained to maintain a professional demeanor and a completely neutral stance, especially when conducting a meeting where two employees who have a history of recent antagonism are both present. As head of human resources, I would ensure that training would incorporate methods of addressing employees in a manner designed to improve their ability to understand the different respective perceptions, sensitivities, and points-of-view of fellow employees to avoid misunderstandings and miscommunications.

5. Mandatory Human Resource Issue Training for All Employees

Likewise, as the head of Human Resources, I would immediately schedule sexual harassment training for all employees in addition to a similar training program with regard to appropriate avenues for initiating complaints against coworkers.

One of the most important aspects of that training would be awareness of potential areas for misunderstandings in words and gestures that could be interpreted in a manner that is unintended by the speaker or actor. Another crucial area that I would include in this training would be the absolute prohibition about ever resorting to "self- help" such as the physically violent response initiated by Sally upon her taking offense (whether rightly or wrongly) to the Raj's hand gesture.