Employers that let supervisors add to or alter the way they conduct
For example, supervisors should never be allowed to assess things like tardiness and attendance using anything but official HR records. As the following case shows, letting a supervisor do his own thing is a dangerous practice.
Recent case: Walter Bohl was terminated from his engineering job at age 61 shortly after returning from he took to undergo prostate cancer treatment. While he was off, the company began cost-cutting efforts, and Bohl’s supervisor had to assess all his employees.
The supervisor began with the standard HR evaluation form, but added evaluation criteria of his own. For example, he decided to rate attendance, punctuality, appearance and . He rated Bohl the lowest overall, and marked him down for poor appearance and attendance.
Bohl filed a discrimination and lawsuit.
But when the supervisor had to explain his ratings in court, he couldn’t provide specifics. For example, he told the court that he did not consult attendance records, relying instead on “general observations” based on his office’s proximity to the entrance. He testified that employees had to “walk past the office every day coming and leaving.”
Of course, that method meant he couldn’t know whether an employee was playing hooky or was off on leave. The court said a jury should decide whether the facts showed FMLA retaliation or interference. (Bohl v. Campbell Haysfeld, No. 1:06-CV-00008, SD OH, 2008)
- Sample Policy: Progressive Discipline
- Consider reassignment to open positions as accommodation
- Employees' Seniority Trumps Disabled Co-Workers' ADA Rights
- DIY health care reform: Create inexpensive, effective wellness programs
- Operate in several states? Beware arbitration pacts referencing states other than California