Employment Relationship Problems: Costs, Benefits and Choices
Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section
Good Practice And Key Lessons
The most effective employers involved in the case studies (those who had few employment relationship problems and dealt with them in cost effective ways) shared several features:
- They set up policies and procedures to deal with the most common or damaging employment issues ahead of time. They made clear to their employees what the boundaries of acceptable conduct were.
- They sought to address potential issues before they led to major conflict.
- They focussed on the major issues of concern and maintained good faith relationships.
- They knew about the full range of resolution methods available and could choose among them according to circumstances.
All of these features are easier to achieve for large organisations. Both of the most effective employers in our case studies were large employers.
Putting policies and procedures into place ahead of time
Having clear policies and procedures was a major factor in the effectiveness of two of the case study employers. They provided employees with clear guidelines on what forms of behaviour were acceptable and managers with procedures to implement when an ERP arose. These policies and procedures meant that they were able to deal with alleged misconduct and other ERPs quickly and fairly. The procedures also meant that the employers could have confidence that any decisions they made would be upheld should the employee take a personal grievance.
We had, in terms of the policy documentation, very strong policy documentation ... had a code of conduct - and that code of conduct afforded us to cover performance issues and disciplinary issues, so it was very easy as a practitioner to work with that document and tie it all together when you're doing an investigation. (HR Manager)
For these employers, it was only on the rare occasions that their procedures were not followed that they felt at risk in taking ERPs through to formal hearings.
This contrasted with the employer who faced what he considered to be serious misconduct but felt that he needed to give the employee three warnings before dismissing him because of a lack of clear policies.
From other evidence, small employers appear less likely to have such policies and procedures in place, a finding that is not surprising given the smaller resources available to them and the lower probability that they will have faced ERPs in the past.
Effective employers also made sure that they had in place clear expectations for employees, which enabled employers to quickly isolate issues.
Settling employment relationship problems quickly
Both the social and financial costs of ERPs rise the longer it takes to reach resolution. The most effective employers in our case studies sought to identify potential problems early and come up with resolutions before relationships deteriorated.
Maintaining "Good Faith" relationships during employment relationship problems
It's a huge waste of time, completely soured my relationship with management, completely changed my view of management. ... I've lost all trust with them ... I've lost ... respect for them in terms of ... in terms of their position and it's changed my view to being - I'm just doing the job. (Employee)
Trust is a precious commodity which can make it easier to reach a resolution of an employment issue.
Good faith requires all parties to an employment relationship to (among other things):
- be active in maintaining positive relationships;
- avoid prejudging the facts of any case;
- give all parties the opportunity to be heard including commenting on any proposal that might be detrimental to their interests;
- maintain appropriate confidentiality and privacy; and
- be open and honest about all dealings.
Where an ERP arises from a relatively nebulous issue, such as conflict between employees or poor fit with the workplace, there is a temptation for employers to find something more objective to use as a reason for removing the person from the workplace. For example, one of the case study employers tried to make over-use of the internet an excuse to dismiss the employee. Another example (in two case studies) was a change in job descriptions which the employees saw as an effort to make them redundant.
These approaches are likely to be destructive of trust and be regarded by employees as showing a lack of good faith. Consequently, anything resembling a "fishing expedition" is likely to escalate the issue into a major dispute. Where the employees had not already brought in legal representation, such tactics led to their bringing representatives in, and representatives took a harder line on experiencing such tactics. It is therefore likely that fishing will extend the process, and therefore the costs.
Flexibility
The most effective employers recognised that there was not one single approach ideal for all ERPs, and tailored their responses to the circumstances. They used informal processes where appropriate, but were not afraid to dismiss an employee where they could demonstrate serious misconduct.