Friday, May 24, 2019

Disciplinarily Process Essay

IntroductionThe purpose of this report is to provide the background and reasons why the decisions by Fair land Australia were make in surface-to-air missiles favour. It identifies areas the familiarity needs to address and implement in order to prevent this type of situation from occurring again.Work History as Sams Team ManagerAs Sams Team Manager I was aware that my predecessors response when dealing with her lacked in encouragement and was poorly handled. Sam is a diligent worker however, due to the company changing programming language to one Sam was unfamiliar with she has been unable to refer specific dead trends. Time was spent with Sam trying to understand her issues and Resources relocated in order to allow Sam extra measure until she was confident and fitted using the new programming language.The offer of additional training was made , but no specific timelines for a action review to discuss feeler on meeting the required standard of performance were given. During t he final meeting with Sam about her inability to meet her latest deadline, Sam physically laid low(p) myself and left the office.A Medical certificate was sent to the office the adjacent day, advising Sam was unfit for work due to stress. The receipt of this medical certificate was affirm over the phone by Sam, to the HR department and conformation made that it had been attested and filed accordingly. It was then the next day that the incident was reported by myself to my supervisor.A meeting was held with myself, my supervisor and the HR Department, the result was that Sam would be terminated on the basis of sound misconduct.. A letter was sent by registered harness to Sams personal address. It was two days later that the unfair dismissal claim was filed by Sam with Fair work Australia.Fair Work Australia HearingThe outcome of the Fair Work Australia hearing between the company and Sam went in Sams favor, this was due to insufficient evidence and backup provided by the compan y regarding Sams dismissal, on the basis of serious misconduct. See attached Risk Analysis (Appendix 1) for Mitigation/Contingencies on Areas of risk for this subject field. The hearing was awarded in Sams favour because of the following grounds * There was no formal disciplinary process.* There was no fair investigation carried out on the act of misconduct. * There was insufficient documentation of claims of employee meetings and reviews. * The medical certificate given to the company by Sam in its authoritative form was not produced by the company for the hearing. * Sam was able to produce a certified copy of the medical certificate as well as email correspondence between herself and the Human Resources department confirming the companies receipt of the medical certificate. * No records or documents of any meetings or coaching sessions were kept by our company. * No evidence of signed, agreed upon and documented performance management reviews or plans were presented by the comp any* No formal disciplinary process followed, allowing for an investigation in the lead up to Sams dismissal. * There was no evidence proving the misconduct claim had taken place or witnesses to call upon to verify the incident. * During meetings where Sam was warned of poor performance, there were no members of senior management present or human resource department specialists. * There were no documented written warnings in Sams file, any agreements made between myself and Sam were verbal. Thus no evidence to support the claim of misconduct by Sam.Proposed Company scheme for defense against unfair dismissal claimsFor the company in future to successfully defend itself against unfair dismissal claims should there be a case of serious misconduct of an employee it needs to ensure it brings its performance management procedure and provide headmaster development in line with Australian legislation, Fair Work Australia practise 2009 Small business fair dismissal (See appendix 2 for website links)By ensuring the company has a clear concise format for performance management and professional development that is documented and filed and reviewed accordingly should employee misconduct occur there is clear evidence of the employees history with the company, management and Human Resources department and the events leading up to the case of misconduct.The company needs to conduct Monthly performance reviews on all staff ensuring that agendas are used and meetings following the reviews are documented and filed according and if poor performance is a topic on the agenda senior management and a human resources specialist is attendance. Decisions made in performance management reviews are to be documented and conducted using the recommended template (see appendix 3)Should the employee still not meet expectations as agreed upon in Performance reviews the following steps need to be followed and all actions taken need to comply with legislation (Fair work Australia Act 2009 Small business fair dismissal) as caste by Fair Work Australia.Proposed Company Strategy for Employee misconductThe company needs to review its insurance policy on what is deemed as employee misconduct and the consequences of employee misconduct, the review of this policy needs to be done by senior management and the Human Resources Department making sure the policy and consequences are clear, concise and in line with legislation as set by Fair Work Australia.The below procedure should be followedConclusionBy completing a review of company policies and procedures regarding Performance Reviews and Employee misconduct (and the consequences), implementing correct documentation (templates) and storage the company and staff will have a clear understanding of individual staff performance, and good documentation.RecommendationBy implementing a structured Review process for all staff, and reviewing the companies policy on misconduct. Staff performance is recorded, plans/goals set and agr eed upon by staff and management and reviewed by the Human Resources Department.In the case of Sams dismissal the recommendation would have been to follow the following steps At the time of the assault it should have been reported to senior management straight away and Human Resources Department notified immediately. An incident/accident report made and an investigation initiated. The regime should have been notified and a disciplinary hearing conducted with the conclusion/decision of Sams loss being verbally notified with a formal letter of termination given to Sam. This should have been done the same day and a soon as possible following the incident.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.