1 / 19

Employee Involvement in the Disciplinary Process

Employee Involvement in the Disciplinary Process. Presented by: Pamela Skyrme, PhD Skyrme & Associates, Inc Cynthia Bender City of Clearwater Human Resources. Progressive Punitive Done “to” employee Adversarial No follow-up No positive recognition. Positive Developmental

libitha
Download Presentation

Employee Involvement in the Disciplinary Process

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Employee Involvement in the Disciplinary Process Presented by: Pamela Skyrme, PhDSkyrme & Associates, Inc Cynthia BenderCity of Clearwater Human Resources

  2. Progressive Punitive Done “to” employee Adversarial No follow-up No positive recognition Positive Developmental Done “with” employee Collaborative Follow-up as necessary Recognizes success Progressive vs. Positive Discipline

  3. Value-Added Outcomes ofPositive Discipline • Provides more complete documentation • Program generates more understanding, acceptance, and support for behavioral change • Focuses on correcting problems, not punishing employees • Recognizes and reinforces good performance

  4. Value-Added Outcomes ofPositive Discipline • Provides method to confront those not meeting standards while maintaining and enhancing the employee’s self-esteem • Influences employees to change behavior, accept responsibility, and return to fully acceptable level of performance • Promotes teamwork and communication at all levels of the organization

  5. PHASE I: Development and Implementation - How We Got Here... • In May 1995, HR formed Constructive Action Team (CAT) to review disciplinary program • CAT conducted focus groups of 10% of employees • CAT decided to develop new program • Unions became involved • Draft of new plan created

  6. PHASE I: Development and Implementation - How We Got Here... • More focus groups held with 10% of employees • Program modified based on feedback • Approval! • Implemented March 1998

  7. Department and Citywide Standards Developed with Employee Input Based on PIE Personal Responsibility Integrity Excellence

  8. Changes in Document Retention • Action plans kept in departments if they are successfully completed • Removed and destroyed after 3 years (per records retention requirements)

  9. Results Based on Supervisor’s Surveyconducted 6 months after implementation 46% response rate Results revealed: • 106 action plans implemented • 53 of action plans successful • 14 terminations or resignations • 26 plans still in effect • 13 unknown outcomes

  10. Benefits of P.B.M.P.Expressed by Supervisors • Positive, problem-solving approach • Better documentation • Can be structured per case • Gives more flexibility • Puts responsibility on employee to improve • Brings intervention and resolution to the first-line supervisory level

  11. Benefits of P.B.M.P.Expressed by Supervisors • Employees seem to feel more comfortable with action plans as opposed to old discipline system • Forces communication of standards • Get direct feedback from employees, rather than relying on hearsay • Solved problem

  12. Difficulties Encountered by Supervisors • Coordinating review dates and times • Need more understanding of program • Told to revise action plan by superior • Persistent problems with same employee • Too much paperwork

  13. Difficulties Encountered by Supervisors • Takes a great deal of time • Better employees feel ignored • Supervisors ignore action plan steps – use coaching only • Some employees don’t take program seriously

  14. Feedback from Employee Focus Groups • Even after mandatory training, many employees don’t know much about the program • Many departments did not include employees in standards revisions • Need more training and information • Other people want to know the outcomes of action plans

  15. Phase II: Where are We Now? • Organized new team • Began department liaison program • Conducted facilitator training • Coordinated supervisor training • Revising standards • Measuring of results

  16. From the City’s Perspective: • Increases accountability • Creates partnerships • Addresses issues quickly • Participation creates buy-in • Uses discipline to teach, not to punish • Corrects problems and deficiencies • Reduces grievances and arbitrations

  17. From the Employee’s Perspective: • Employee-building • Creates team building and communication • Employee is accountable • Much more positive - not fear-based • Employees are taught and coached – not punished

  18. For More Information, Contact: • Pamela Skyrme, PhDSkyrme & Associates, Inc727-443-3199 skyrme@mindspring.com • Cynthia BenderCity of Clearwater Human Resources727-562-4845cbender@clearwater-fl.com

More Related