Total Articles: 7
5 egregious errors that endanger employment investigations
Earlier this summer, in writing about reference information for bad employees (I call them "the Axis of Evil"), I mentioned employment investigations, noting that this was a topic for another post. Well, today is the day. Now that the Supreme Court has officially recognized "cat's paw" liability for employers whose decisions are tainted by an individual with an unlawful motive, it is more important than ever for employers to conduct workplace investigations that are above reproach.
Conducting Independent Reviews of Proposed Personnel Decisions Can Reduce Litigation Risks (pdf).
With ever-expanding workloads
and the pressure to make
decisions quickly, senior
managers and human
resources personnel may fi nd it
diffi cult to conduct independent
reviews of personnel decisions
recommended or initiated by
fi rst-line managers. Although
tempting, giving in to the urge
to “rubber-stamp” such
recommendations can be
costly. Using what some courts
refer to as the “cat’s paw”
theory, the fi rst-line supervisor’s
biases can be attributed to the
employer, even though the fi nal
decision maker had no idea the
employee at issue was a
member of a protected class.
Two recent decisions provide
helpful guidance for employers
seeking to minimize their risks
in such situations.
Internal Investigation Supports Company’s Legitimate Business Reason for Termination.
Sharon Sybrandt was fired from her position as an Operations Assistant Manager at one of Home Depot’s Nashville stores after she allowed a co-worker to use her password-protected user ID to modify a special order transaction for Sybrandt. In addition, Sybrandt herself subsequently entered computerized “notes” on the transaction, indicating that she wanted to cancel part of the order and receive a refund. Both actions were in violation of the company’s “no-self-serve” policy. After Sybrandt was replaced by a male employee, she sued Home Depot, alleging gender discrimination under both federal and state laws. The lower court granted the company’s motion for summary judgment in April 2008, and the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal recently upheld that decision.
Good Investigations Pay Great Dividends, Part 2.
In the last issue of Healthcare Update, we discussed the recent decision of Furline v. Morrison. In that case the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit overturned a jury award against Howard University Hospital. The fact that the hospital had conducted a thorough independent investigation into allegations of age bias weighed heavily in the Court's decision.
Good Investigations Pay Great Dividends.
In the current economy, many managers and supervisors are being asked to do more with less, and success in today's market is marked by efficiency. Increasingly, managers and supervisors are being given more authority to handle personnel related matters and have less time to devote to handling such issues with care.
Workplace Investigations: Whom to Call.
As the number of employment laws has grown, so has the number of opportunities for employees to complain about violations of those laws. At the same time, courts have placed on employers increasing responsibility to conduct immediate, good faith, and complete investigations, particularly in the area of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation.
Employment Investigation Advice From the Great Detective Novels.
Down these mean streets a man must go who is not himself mean, who is neither tarnished nor afraid. The detective must be a complete man and a common man and yet an unusual man. He must be, to use a rather weathered phrase, a man of honor.
