|
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
|
Author
|
Topic: A very ugly staff issue
|
Dominic Espinosa
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1172
From: California, U.S.A.
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 12-30-2006 05:23 PM
Greetings again all. I don't really like having all this crap out in the open but I could sure use some creative ideas here.
I've got this employee, left over from the previous manager. Most of his old cohorts quit or were forced out when I took over because the original manager didn't enforce policies like dress code and spoilage. I do, and some of them didn't want to listen to me.
Anyhow, instead of hitting the road this one decided almost immediately to go over my head to my supervisor with complaints. Most of which were not rooted in truth, he for example has no clue about inventory or projection therefor couldn't make a good case against my abilities in those areas but complained a great deal about them.
We sat down and spoke about this and other issues and he mellowed out. Problem now is that he picked up a rumor based on a hypothetical question no one asked him. The old manager wants his job back so now this employee is working double time (now going over my supervisors head) trying to get me fired so his little buddy can come back.
My supervisor is on my side. He tells me what goes on up there, and he probably shouldn't so it's not like I can say "hey, stop screwing with me or else...", that would compromise him and make no progress.
On the flipside, if he knows he's being watched he'll make sure no matter what he doesn't act up knowing I'll dump him in a heartbeat.
I feel as though this guy is a complete detriment to the vision I have for my theater. I don't feel that he plays on the same team or genuinely cares about the theater.
He refuses to act as a part of the team. If I take a day away when the seasons slow down he throws a temper tantrum about it.
His latest ploy is trying to get other staff members to rebel against me. I get reports of it from staff, from my second assistant, and it's evident in the more impressionable, younger employees who see him do something or hear him say something and then start talking back to me about trivial tasks such as taking out trash.
I feel like any time I have to tell him something he turns it into a personal attack against him and throws a fit.
I wonder if he does it just to make it so unpleasant I avoid it...hmm.
This guy has to go!
/end rant
[ 10-23-2007, 03:28 PM: Message edited by: Dominic Espinosa ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
David Graves
Film Handler
Posts: 38
From: Cocoa, FL
Registered: Nov 2006
|
posted 12-30-2006 06:10 PM
I don't understand the problem- the kid is obviously creating a negative work environment. Your boss gave you the ok to get rid of him. What are you waiting for?
If you are a right-to-work state, you don't need a reason to fire him. Either one of you has the right to terminate his employment without reason. And you definitely don't want to give him one. Simply bring him to the office, tell him it's not working out, and that he no longer works for you. If he asks why, just repeat that it's not going to work out. If you don't give him a specific reason for termination, you don't have to give one should he take you to court or file for unemployment.
If you're not a a right-to-work state, write him for insubordination. Find something specific that he has verbally said that you can put on paper. Then suspend him for two weeks and say that on his next infraction, you will terminate him. He shows up four minutes late for a break, he forgets to clean a row in a theater, he's gone.
New managers can be shy about things like this, but the reality is that so long as you're not egregiously violating policy, your bosses could care less about a $5.25 an hour worker as long as the money keeps coming in. What's more detrimental than the issues that will arise from firing a long-time employee is the fact that you are wasting time thinking and worrying about this. He'll be forgotten in a week, and you can get on with managing the theater correctly.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dustin Mitchell
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1865
From: Mondovi, WI, USA
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 12-31-2006 01:34 AM
Its important to remember 'right to work' and 'employment at will' are two very different things. In a 'right to work' state you can't be forced to join a union to work somewhere. In states that don't have a 'right to work' law you usually have to join the union if the place of business has a contract with on.
'Employment at will' is what refers to termination without cause. There are a couple of important things to remember about this, primarily that you still have to be carefull about firing women, minorities, people over 40 (the official age when 'age discrimination' can be claimed), or any other protected class. Also, if you fire someone without cause they will be able to claim unemployment. Not a problem when dealing with part time mininum wage employees, many of whom wouldn't qualify for unemployment anyway, but something to keep in mind.
Most importantly remember that state and federal laws will apply to whatever situation you have to handle AND THE MORE RESTRICTIVE LAW TAKES PRECEDENT. Do remember that although many state employment laws are similar each state is different. As an example, in some states homosexuals are a protected class (in regards to discrimination) and in others are not.
Good luck.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Monte L Fullmer
Film God
Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004
|
posted 12-31-2006 02:39 AM
..could a situation draw like this to protect the employer of any legality (outside of still keeping documents of discpline of the said employee) is to place the offending employee on an "indefinite suspension" and never outright firing that individual.
Thus, the offending employee is still legally employed, yet not scheduled for any work.
After two plus weeks of no workie, that employee will realize that there is no monies coming in and will then do the "smart" thing and that is to outright quit to go find other employment -he used his right to terminate himself from that company and not being forced out by outright firing.
Thus with quitting, it releases the employer from any form of liability since the employer only placed that person on the "indifinite suspension" - by keeping that person on payroll and let the offending employee make the final decision on his future with that company.
Kinda of a reverse role in this situation: The employee definitely controls his destiny since he came to the employer for work in the first place - not the employer dragging that individual off the street in to work for them.
Thus, the employer places full responsibility on the employee to make the decision on his work ethics: If the employee really wants to work, then the employer will make the possible efforts to keep the employee since the employee is doing his fair share. But, if the employee chooses to make work ethics miserable, then the employer will NOT issue out the final decision, but just to 'suspend' the employee - to get them out of the work atmosphere so the employee can make the decision on either staying or leaving...on his own.
Only times of outright firing is things leads up to such an legal action that has to be followed.
Or, being let go from within the probationary (testing) period, and the "at will" status that the employee has acknowledged in signing the application.
-Monte
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[beer]](graemlins/beer.gif)
![[bs]](graemlins/bs.gif)
I find this totally dishonorable, and just downright dirty. I would never condone such an action. If you have an issue with an employee, it needs to be address to the employee directly. It's very underhanded. If an employee is bad enough he need not work there anymore, do the right thing and just fire him. So many places do that crap because they're too cheap to pay the potential increase in their unemployment fund. Places like that are usually run by scumbags who only care about numbers and money.
Printer-friendly view of this topic