HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Case Study:

An employee (Joe) was hired as a Senior Engineer on contract to resolve a flooding issue affecting what is now known as the Emerald Greens Golf and Country Club of Carrollwood Village. The manager who hired Joe petitioned the executive staff of the large corporation, over 10,000 people, to wave the pay scale limitations for the job position description. Joe completed the job, and subsequently was hired full time in their Planning Department, and then moved to the Fiscal Department. During the six years employed at the offices in downtown Tampa, Joe had the opportunity to be involved in a multiplicity of duties providing a broad level of interaction with different systems corporation wide. This included stormwater infrastructure design, client meetings, site inspection visits, permitting meetings, staff coordination, budgeting, preparing procedure manuals, websites and training other staff amongst other duties.

It was a critical time for change both in the company and the nation as a whole. The internet was suddenly opened to the public with the development of the web browser and the simultaneous onslaught of inexpensive personal computers. Every firm was struggling to get into this new digital paradigm to exploit the new opportunities. As a stormwater engineer, specializing in one of the most used and accepted infrastructure computer modeling software programs, Joe was accustomed to arriving at a new firm and upgrading their computer infrastructure before beginning to work. This new company soon discovered this and was intent on utilizing all his skills and contacts throughout their operations.

Within months of being hired as a full time staff engineer, Joe was contacted by a senior manager who was exploring the new internet technologies. As a director in a separate public service charity at the local university, Joe was also in deep discussions with the university senior technological staff about the new opportunities the internet afforded the university. The company soon sent Joe back to college driving a company truck, all expenses paid with a flexible schedule allowing part time classes and contract negotiation opportunities. The hope was that Joe could organize the company's new technology infrastructure after the digital technology processes the university had tested and implemented.

It was an exciting time, with great opportunities and experiences unfolding every day. Joe created the first company website, doubled his department's digital infrastructure budget, trained staff on new automation techniques and enjoyed the freedom to attend day classes and debate new technologies over lunch with university officials. He soon had the first company laptop, the newest Window NT Server Computer and was scheduled to get a new company vehicle. Suddenly, he got an interesting phone call from another department. This manager called to say he was the network administrator in the Information Technology Department (ITS) and wanted the new server shut off immediately. Joe laughed. The Novel technologies in the ITS department were fine for email, but still light-years behind the superior technologies in Planning for web development. Joe knew quite well that it would be months before ITS could get anything online and all his equipment and activities were approved by the highest levels in the company.

But something about this phone call seemed a little odd to Joe. Not just the audacity of some clown from another department trying to stop what the Planning Department Director authorized and funded him to do. Joe backed up all his emails, dating from the very first day he started, and even made disk copies to take home. This was all still on the ITS network so who knows what could happen. Then he even printed it all out sitting by the printer until the wee hours of the morning. Security staff recognized Joe, since his odd hours with school had him dropping in late at night on more than one occasion. He left with what must have been 2 reams of paper under his arm after 3am.

When Joe arrived the next day after lunch his immediate supervisor called him into his office. The last time Joe had even spoken to this supervisor it was about customizing some software on his machine. Joe rarely ever saw him and the last three performance reviews defined goals of meeting Director's initiative for automating the department. This supervisor essentially had no idea what Joe was doing 99% of the time and essentially the last visit asked for "a favor to help" him understand the technologies being implemented. Joe was a bit surprised by his request to come into his office, but he had kinda had seen the writing on the wall the night before.

He then handed Joe a notice from the Information Technology Department Director claiming that Joe had "jeopardized the security" of the companies technology infrastructure.

Joe about laughed!

But then Joe was told to return the company laptop, truck keys and other equipment, and he would be put on paid suspension until an investigation was completed so this could be resolved. Paid leave? Investigation? What?

"Please have these on my desk before you leave today."

That was weird; the supervisor really didn't even know what equipment Joe had. Joe went to the department director's office to see what was really going on. Of course there was no sign of him, but Joe was told that he had better listen to his immediate supervisor or it would be considered insubordination. Joe went back to my office and found his network ID shut off, so he packed up and left.



Within a week Joe received a reprimand notice of employee policy infractions. Now Joe really laughed, it was almost 20 pages long and had statements in the beginning that contradicted statements in the end. Joe's parents had a business which was expanding so they recently moved into a larger office leaving their home office empty for him to work in. He rifled through the emails and prepared a similarly weighted reply pointing out the company's errors in great detail. His mom read through the stack of emails getting completely sick to her stomach at the inept incompetence seen over and over again as Joe had struggled to bring the company technical infrastructure into order the last few years.

At the disciplinary hearing they made their claims, accepted his written response and adjourned for deliberations. Ten (10) months later Joe was asked to come back to the office. Evidently someone in the EEOC had written to ask about a company engineer paid to stay home. When Joe arrived he was told to empty his desk and move into another department.

"Excuse me? What about the hearing and the claims against me."

"You have your same title and same salary, get back to work."

"Of course I will have to file an employee grievance now."

"You do whatever you want to do, now get back to work."

Joe prepared a grievance; it was over an inch thick, with fifty (50) employment policy violations. At the hearing which included one HR staff, and 3 peer managers the grievance was submitted and tabled. Nothing more was done and Joe was told to get back to work.

His wife had filed for divorce when Joe decided to file the grievance; she said he could never win. His mother's "sick to the stomach" was determined to be stage 3 Ovarian Cancer. The first thing Joe did in the new department was sign up for the mental health counselor provided by the company insurance program.

The new supervisor soon filed a reprimand following a doctor's appointment, claiming Joe had no approval for them. Soon he discovered that several employees in this new department had filed grievances against the company as well. Two more times he had scheduled to be somewhere else and the supervisor claimed Joe had not told him and filed a reprimand.

Joe contacted EEOC and they told him they could not do anything unless he was a minority discriminated against. Then Joe contacted a State Investigator. He was told, they could only investigate crimes involving over $3000. The new supervisor filed another reprimand, claiming Joe had used company equipment to contact others outside the company on personal business in violation of company policies. Once again Joe prepared a reply and the same HR and 3 "peer managers" were there, ignoring his reply and supporting the manager.

Joe soon posted signs in his cubicle "Warning all communications are being recorded," and began carrying a mini recorder in his front shirt pocket. Within two weeks a County Sheriff was called into investigate charges that Joe was illegally recording meetings. The Sheriff interviewed staff and the management making the claim. Warning signs regarding Joe's intent to record all interactions with supervisors and staff were clearly posted throughout his work space. No one could visit or see him without seeing one of the posted signs, or see the little red light on the recorder in his front pocket. The Sheriff carefully took pictures of these, and Joe also provided an original. During the interview, Joe described how his supervisor would be told about doctors appointments, but then file a rule violation notice when he left for the appointment. Joe explained several other events where this supervisor intentionally contradicted earlier agreements and statements to his detriment. After several hours of review the Sheriff concluded that there was no violation of state law. The Sheriff subsequently told Joe privately to file a suit against the employer.

The supervisor then installed a punch clock and Joe and some other staff where told to punch in and out for everything. This included trips to the bathroom, smoke breaks, doctor's visits etc. Joe received another reprimand for coming in late to the office when the supervisor reviewed the time clock cards. One other employee was arrested. He had been stuck in traffic when coming to work and knew he would be fired if he were late again. He pulled out a pistol and shot another car on the bridge coming into Tampa.

Then Joe learned that the employee had a discrimination suit against the company as well. While on vacation out of state the attorneys settled the suit without his knowing. Joe had the same attorney. Joe immediately checked into the grievance and appeals processes to find out where things stood. He then filed for the appeal himself and was soon told he was too late; the statute of limitations had expired.

Subsequently Joe was terminated; his mother died that same week of ovarian cancer.


Analysis:

The first issue to address was on line 25 where Joe described his new duties. He was employed and listed as an exempt employee, but his job title did not match his job duties. Based on this alone he really acted only as an independent contractor, not an employee fixed by a specific job description. If his case came to court the Company could claim he was only a contractor and therefore had no rights under the employee handbook at all. If his grievance and subsequent termination were all ruled by the handbook, the company really did him a favor and could have simply terminated him at any time as determined by the contract.

Based on the duties defined in line 29 Joe was doing many of the job functions of a senior manager, such as discussing contracts and budgeting. Joe could claim he was being exploited. This might allow him to renegotiate his contract, but the courts would not perceive it as anything more that his own poor judgment. If he is doing duties beyond his job description then the Company simply has gotten the better side of the deal. However, if this were a public company, administered by the state, he could file with the Civil Service Board for back pay requiring that they pay him for the duties he completed as required by the Civil Service Act of 1996.

Line 35 described a conflict between Joe and the Network Administrator. Joe subsequently found the Administrator had a fraudulent application on file in the HR Department. The Administrator had listed a Bachelor of Science degree in Computer Science, while in fact it was a Bachelor of Arts in History. At this point Joe could have filed a civil legal action for fraud, or slander against the administrator since a History major could never determine a security breach in the first place. Joe later determined the Administrator did not have the necessary technical skills either, but only managed staff who did have the adequate skills, none of who completed any analysis or determined network security which was itself a very detailed undertaking. If this were a public company Joe could file a complaint with the Civil Service Board. However, the board could respond the application was of no consequence since the manager employed the administrator anyway. However, he could have filed a slander suit against the department director who assumed the administrator knew something. Court decisions have been in favor of the injured party, where the statute of limitations started when the discovery of the injury or act of negligence should "reasonably have been discovered." 4 years is the time limit for fraud, Florida Statutes Chapter 95.11(3)(j).

Line 67 indicated that the claims against him had contradictions. If this had gotten before a judge it would have been thrown out abruptly. Joe could have filed a harassment claim but since this harassment was not sexual in nature it would not fall under the Civil Rights Laws in Florida or otherwise.

When EEOC got involved, as indicated in line 78, Joe investigated filing a claim with them. EEOC informed him that they couldn't do anything for him unless he was a minority discriminated against under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Pay Act of 1963, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, Title I and Title V of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, or the Civil Rights Act of 1991. However, there must have been something there for them if they were snooping into company business? Joe should have investigated it more.

On line 85-90 Joe's family clearly had been impacted by the stressful circumstances he was under. This is not actionable under the laws from a private company or the laws in Florida. There might be something that can be reviewed under civil court where defamation claims and intentional tort are more amenable to this kind of action since the resulting emotional distress and mental anguish are often considered sufficient damages.

If Joe coordinated an action with the other staff mentioned on line 92 he might have been able to be involved in a class action. The other staff had already had litigation pending, where Joe could have benefited, this collaboration would have been protected by the Wagner Act.

Joe is actually from Hispanic origin and could be involved in a minority discrimination action as listed in line 96. The peer managers listed in line 100 were discriminating against him, taking the position of the supervisors without any review of what Joe had submitted. They actually ignored his claims and discounted any evidence he provided without any cause. The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 contains a number of prohibitions, known as prohibited personnel practices including:

(9) take, fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to take a personnel action against an employee or applicant for exercising an appeal, complaint, or grievance right; testifying for or assisting another in exercising such a right; cooperating with or disclosing information to the Special Counsel or to an Inspector General; or refusing to obey an order that would require the individual to violate a law.



The records mentioned in line 105 could have been used to substantiate the discrimination claims. Further if Joe investigated the false claims filed against him listed in line 113, he could have pursued a case. This information could further be used in making the discrimination case a lot stronger. Even the time clock issues mentioned in line 116 would have demonstrated a hostile work environment toward the minorities. However, there were other minorities in the department who were not subjected to such harassment. The judge might recognize that this time clock issue appeared with the other legal actions the employees were pursuing which would have supported a retaliation claim. Many courts have ruled that retaliation need not involve firing or demotion; simple harassment or hostility qualifies.

Joe could have been a lot more proactive in the legal battle and hired a better attorney to get these issues addressed. The EEOC might have viewed Joe as just another "pretty white boy" but he was technically a minority so he could have pushed a case through if they wanted to or not. Joe needs to study more of his rights and focus on this to protect them.

In conclusion, the actions of the Civil Service Board denying Joe any due process constitute official misconduct (malfeasance); wrongful exercise of lawful authority (misfeasance); and, neglect of duty bestowed upon them by legislative act. The director simply told Joe "It's nothing personal; I'm just doing my job."