Staff Discipline Question

Forums › IT Pro and developers › Staff Discipline Question

networkn

Networkn
32862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15453

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#157536 4-Dec-2014 01:02

In theory, if a mid level technical person worked for an IT Company and during the interview process and pretty much incessantly during their employment it was made VERY VERY clear that backups were the TOP priority in any situation, and you believe that said staff member clearly understood that, if a situation occurred where said
staff member was asked to deploy a backup solution but forgot which didn't result in a customer losing data (But did leave them less protected than would have otherwise been the case, how severe would justifiable employment discipline be fair to take? Would it be considered reasonable it was a sack able offence, or something less severe?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

4631 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 874

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1188396 4-Dec-2014 05:56

Nothing happen and this is the first error - I won't sweat over it.

Stern warning and constructive criticism are my choices. Mistakes, forgetfulness are part of human nature.

roobarb

701 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 643

Trusted

#1188400 4-Dec-2014 06:25

Was the work peer-reviewed?

Was the work signed off by a higher level manager?

Was the work formally accepted by the client?

andrewNZ

2487 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1461
Inactive user

#1188403 4-Dec-2014 06:47

This could be a written warning, depending on circumstances. The trick with discipline is you need to consistent with it across all employees, and it can't be based on emotional factors.

I think the real issue to tackle is task management. If the request was verbal and there is no process for ensuring things are done, things like this are bound to happen.

Yogi02

241 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 52

#1188408 4-Dec-2014 07:30

Within the 90 days probation?
Were the instructions clear and not implied

While you can gather a lot of information in an interview, you cant proceed on any formal disciplinary action unless instructions were clear, verbal or written and delivered to them while they were employed by you.

Is this their first client project for you?

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1188412 4-Dec-2014 07:41

networkn:
In theory, if a mid level technical person worked for an IT Company and during the interview process and pretty much incessantly during their employment it was made VERY VERY clear that backups were the TOP priority in any situation, and you believe that said staff member clearly understood that, if a situation occurred where said
staff member was asked to deploy a backup solution but forgot which didn't result in a customer losing data (But did leave them less protected than would have otherwise been the case, how severe would justifiable employment discipline be fair to take? Would it be considered reasonable it was a sack able offence, or something less severe?

If they were asked verbally to do it, then I don't think anything beyond some constructive criticism is warranted, and a change in business process to ensure that in future there is a job/workorder that explicitly covers it.
If there was a written job/workorder,and it was ignored then a written warning is reasonable. I'm pretty sure if you tried to fire someone over something like that without a solid history of warnings you'd be $50,000 poorer after an ERA decision.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup. Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12765

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1188414 4-Dec-2014 07:50

Depending on the affect on both companies, the written instructions Code of conduct and written minimum standards it could be deemed serious misconduct and a dismissal incident.

If those are not the case then it would be stage one of the discipline process, that is informal meeting and some time given to establishing in writing COC and minimum standards, these need to be signed by both parties.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Geekzone

Want to support Geekzone and browse the site without the ads? Subscribe to Geekzone now (monthly, annual and lifetime options).

Handle9

11922 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9674

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1188415 4-Dec-2014 07:50

If something is so important that it could result in termination then you should probaby have a formal process around it. For example our company has a zero tolerance policy where staff fail to wear personal protective equipment.

There is a policy which describes the consequences and staff have to do a declaration on their phones prior to starting on a site for the day. It creates a framework for managing the performance, and consequences for those who breach.

If something is your number one priority do you have systems in place to manage it? Eg tick sheets etc. if you do and they are knowingly falsified you would have far more opportunity for discipline. Equally if you are within the 90 days and get a sense that this sort of thing may continue, you would probably consider termination any way, it's much harder after 90 days.

timmmay

20857 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5349

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1188417 4-Dec-2014 07:54

Put it in writing, formally, that this is a required task. Set up whatever meetings and process are required. At this stage I think a verbal warning would potentially be appropriate, though written may be a little too far.

insane

3324 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1006

ID Verified

Trusted

2degrees

Subscriber

#1188430 4-Dec-2014 08:01

I'm with the voices above in that a 'check sheet' of sorts needs to be used for all builds to ensure every aspect is covered off before it's handed over into BAU. While in this case you may believe the employee has made his employer look bad, the reality is that it's actually on the company he works for to ensure these checks and balances are on place to ensure this never happens in the first place.

Verbal warning would suffice

1101

3141 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1143

#1188583 4-Dec-2014 12:17

networkn:
staff member was asked .....

asked,.. how?.
Over the ph ?, asked while they were busy on other tasks? . Asked via email ?
Its very easy for the asker to be vague and not realise it. Or to simply think they have asked but didnt.
As an employeee Ive had that , those asking where pretty damn vague.
Or didnt actually ask/request at all .

Everyone makes mistakes & everyone can forget.

networkn

Networkn
32862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15453

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1188585 4-Dec-2014 12:22

1101:
networkn:
staff member was asked .....

asked,.. how?.
Over the ph ?, asked while they were busy on other tasks? . Asked via email ?
Its very easy for the asker to be vague and not realise it. Or to simply think they have asked but didnt.
As an employeee Ive had that , those asking where pretty damn vague.
Or didnt actually ask/request at all .

Everyone makes mistakes & everyone can forget.

Asked in person whilst they had no other distractions, and SOME things you can forget when you work in IT, backup is NOT one of those things.

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
32862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15453

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1188587 4-Dec-2014 12:24

Yogi02: Within the 90 days probation?
Were the instructions clear and not implied

While you can gather a lot of information in an interview, you cant proceed on any formal disciplinary action unless instructions were clear, verbal or written and delivered to them while they were employed by you.

Is this their first client project for you?

Sadly outside of the 90 days. They were VERY clear. Verbally presented. The staff member beside him clearly understood them and says "an idiot could understand" what was expected of them.

networkn

Networkn
32862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15453

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1188588 4-Dec-2014 12:26

nakedmolerat: Nothing happen and this is the first error - I won't sweat over it.

Stern warning and constructive criticism are my choices. Mistakes, forgetfulness are part of human nature.

So it's considered serious if the customer was to lose data (and then sue us), but fine if no actual loss occurred? Seems a tad unreasonable that the world should need to end in order for it to be considered a serious breach.

jonathan18

7415 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2850

ID Verified

Trusted

#1188618 4-Dec-2014 12:57

networkn:
nakedmolerat: Nothing happen and this is the first error - I won't sweat over it.

Stern warning and constructive criticism are my choices. Mistakes, forgetfulness are part of human nature.

So it's considered serious if the customer was to lose data (and then sue us), but fine if no actual loss occurred? Seems a tad unreasonable that the world should need to end in order for it to be considered a serious breach.

I'd say the general tenor of the posts above is that it was possible (and indeed appropriate) to have done more to ensure the employee was fully cognisant of the requirement, and that had best practice been followed (eg having it stated in writing, having a job sheet where it was to be ticked off...) the employer/manager would have far stronger grounds to take the employee to task, including the possibility of issuing a written warning for a failure to follow specified processes. In the absence of this, and especially given no actual consequential loss occured, the options logically need to be more "reasonable".

Surely if this is considered a "serious breach" it would be appropriate for the requirement to be confirmed in writing and for processes to be put in place to reduce the likeihood of it not occuring? If employees are to be held accountable for "serious breaches", there needs to be clear and unambiguous acknowledgement of such requirements. Ensuring everything like this is in writing also offers advantages to the employer in such situations, as it won't need to descend to to a "he said, she said" situation of trying to rehash previous conversations.

lxsw20

3689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2174

Subscriber

#1188619 4-Dec-2014 13:02

networkn: Verbally presented.

Good luck.

Next time follow up with an email of your expectations. If they are as useless as you say it won't take long for them to drop the ball again and you will have a paper trail. At most I would say you could give a verbal warning, but even then it may be worth talking to an employment lawyer first.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4