After a discrimination complaint has been found to be without merit, most reasonable employees accept their employer’s conclusions and go back to doing their jobs. But some become bitter, suspecting that HR andare out to get them and interpreting every subsequent interaction as evidence of a hostile conspiracy.
When this happens, the worst thing you can do is play into the fear. It will only make matters worse.
Instead, treat the employee the same as you would any other employee—and recognize that he may sue.
Recent case: Mehdi Moini, who is of Middle Eastern descent, worked as an engineering professor at the University of Texas. Moini thought he was being unfairly singled out for criticism. He complained about national-origin discrimination that he believed was rooted in prejudice following the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
University management concluded that Moini wasn’t the victim of discrimination.
That didn’t satisfy Moini, who started cataloging incidents he said created a hostile work environment. For example, he claimed that files had been deleted from his office computer and that documents he kept in his office disappeared.
He also claimed the university was spying on him. When teaching in a classroom outfitted with video equipment, he said he could hear the cameras running and thought this meant supervisors were secretly filming him.
Moini also said his supervisor and co-workers were following him around the university campus. But he added that others tailed him at home. He complained about four middle-aged men he saw in a car parked near his home. Although he wasn’t able to identify them or link them to anyone at the university, Moini claimed the men were watching him.
All this, Moini claimed, amounted to harassment and created a hostile work environment.
Eventually, the university refused to renew Moini’s contract, he lost his job and he sued for discrimination.
The court tossed out his case. It said Moini couldn’t prove any surveillance took place and couldn’t connect any alleged surveillance to anyone at the university. His office-tampering claims weren’t persuasive either. He never tied the university to the incidents, and admitted that his office door wasn’t always locked. Anyone, including students, could have entered. (Moini v. University of Texas at Austin, No. A-10-CA-180, WD TX, 2011)
Final note: Even if an employee makes allegations that seem paranoid and irrational, don’t tell him so. That just opens up the possibility of a perceived-as-disabled ADA lawsuit. Plus, such accusations may fuel the employee’s apparent paranoia.
On the other hand, you do have an obligation to ensure. If you think an employee may be a danger to himself or others, contact your attorney and your for guidance. They can help you decide how to tackle a potentially dangerous situation without raising the risk of litigation.
Like what you've read? ...Republish it and share great business tips!
Attention: Readers, Publishers, Editors, Bloggers, Media, Webmasters and more...
We believe great content should be read and passed around. After all, knowledge IS power. And good business can become great with the right information at their fingertips. If you'd like to share any of the insightful articles on BusinessManagementDaily.com, you may republish or syndicate it without charge.
The only thing we ask is that you keep the article exactly as it was written and formatted. You also need to include an attribution statement and link to the article.
" This information is proudly provided by Business Management Daily.com: http://www.businessmanagementdaily.com/13321/play-it-straight-when-employees-complaints-become-irrational-stick-with-sound-procedures "
- Refusing to follow orders doesn't always equal insubordination
- 11 for '11: The top trends in HR, pay & perks
- Consider consulting an attorney before stating why you terminated an employee
- Can I demand reimbursement of training costs?
- 'Same-actor' defense won't always work; establish unbiased reasons for firings