Overview: Employee discipline can improve communication with employees and foster positive outcomes - but only if used effectively. An employee's professional development may be aided by any number of measures, including targeted employee training and development or a referral to counseling. However, disciplinary action should also be used to ensure compliance with work rules and to promote workplace safety. In addition, employee discipline is a natural next step if an employee has not complied with a performance improvement plan (PIP) or action plan.
Although progressive discipline may be adequate to address many situations, at times immediate suspension or termination must be used. Employers need the proper tools to tackle commonplace workplace discipline situations, such as poor attendance, substance abuse and workplace theft. These tools include a variety of resources to aid in conducting discipline successfully, including internal policies and procedures and customized warnings.
Trends: States continue to enact legislation enlarging employee protections regarding an array of activities, ranging from smoking to voting to weapons possession. In addition, employees continue to make external agency complaints or file court claims under statutes with antiretaliation or whistleblower protections, such as federal and state False Claims Acts. Depending on state law, employers may be restricted from taking a number of actions during a disciplinary investigation, e.g., employee drug or polygraph testing. In other instances, an employer's failure to adequately discipline an employee or to document the results of a disciplinary investigation may pose greater liability problems, such as in the case of an external agency probe or an employment discrimination lawsuit.
Author: Marta Moakley, JD, Legal Editor
In-depth review of the spectrum of Connecticut employment law requirements HR must follow with respect to employee discipline.
New Hampshire employers seeking to emphasize compliance with and educate their workforces about the law prohibiting employers from requiring that employees not disclose or discuss information about their wages, salary or paid benefits should consider including this model policy statement in their handbook.
This section assists HR professionals in minimizing liability risks. The section also highlights the federal government's major enforcement initiatives and possible damages, fines or penalties resulting from noncompliance.
In-depth review of the spectrum of Massachusetts employment law requirements HR must follow with respect to employee discipline.
In-depth review of the spectrum of Utah employment law requirements HR must follow with respect to performance appraisals.
Under a new law, effective January 1, 2016, Hawaii will prohibit the use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) in the workplace.
In-depth review of the spectrum of New York employment law requirements HR must follow with respect to involuntary terminations.
In-depth review of the spectrum of Hawaii employment law requirements HR must follow with respect to employee discipline.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has reached a settlement with Texas-based multistate oil-drilling company Patterson-UTI in a race and national origin discrimination, harassment and retaliation lawsuit. The allegations involved workplaces throughout the country.
HR and legal considerations regarding fair and consistent employee discipline. Advice on disciplining with effective results, no discrimination.