AboutTimmy Chou Expertise I am a experienced Mediator and a partner in a management consulting firm. As a mediator I work as a third-party neutral and specialize in partnership/shareholder disputes, management/labor issues, company culture difficulties, and family-owned business problems. I can help describe why alternative dispute resolution may be a good choice for you. As an experienced management consultant I may be able to offer creative ideas to help resolve your organizational and business problems and disputes. "If you say conflict, I say opportunity".
Question I was a manager at Family Dollar. I was terminated for willful misconduct on January 6th of this year. Basically I was terminated because of a complaint by a former employee concerning some allegations of inappropriate conduct. The complaint was made by my assistant manager, whom I had to fire because of dishonesty, theft. This complaint was made after the fact...obviously a retaliation because of her firing. Loss Prevention came in and interviewed most employees and myself. They stated I was terminated for willful misconduct because of the complaint made by my former assistant. If there was an issue with me, isn't it unfair to consider a complaint after the fact. Why was there not a complaint while this employee was still working. I feel I was not treated fairly and I would like to know if there are any legal remedies available to me.
Answer Thank you for your question!
Mediators act as neutral third parties to disputes and never "get involved" in judging the merits of conflict, but merely use special techniques to help the parties decide how to negotiate their own settlement.
The case you describe here is very typical and can be considered a "classic" workplace dispute presentation. I am not a lawyer and cannot mediate this with you alone but I can respond to your question from my business consulting experience.
Note that this issue will have legal issues and you may wish to consult a labor attorney.
It may be useful for you to consider that right and wrong are not always the most useful places to begin in dealing with these sorts of problems. As you may know, there is a cost to exacting justice and the costs can be quite high. Remember that your person-hood and your work are not even remotely related and that the most successful people at work are often the least successful with others since they have often become successful on the bodies of those they have slain.
You don't say how long you have been with the company but I am presuming you have been there awhile since no one survives at your level for long without a solid record of performance.
I would be very interested in reviewing your company's grevance procedures with a view to seeing if these procedures were followed. Typically you have an assumed right to correct a problem before you can be dismissed. I would be interested in your relationship with your superiors since it does not appear that there was an option to just call you in and say "We have a problem with this or that, lets talk about it". Remember that some states are considered "employment at will" states, which means that without some agreement about your continuing employment or some behavior on the part of the company that could be interpreted to imply a continuing relationship, or a specific contract, the company can terminate you at-will for any reason.
Assuming you want to keep this job and are willing to invest considerable time and money and live as an "adversary in residence" at your company forever more, your only hope is to go on the offense.
First, you must document your work history in great detail. All your performance should be documented with attention to your relationship to the boss and the company's approval of your behavior and how you have done business for all of this time without problems.
If you have one, I would review your employment agreement as well as the company personnel procedures and document any deviations from policy, as well as explore any policy regarding your rights to challenge things.
Once you have this stuff all down you should confront the problem with a carefully worded letter to the company confronting the truth about the situation. It should say, in essence, "You have done X, Y and Z in my case on the basis of retaliatory hearsay evidence provided by an individual having motive for undermining my employment relationship with the company. I have been an exemplary employee for 10 years and have done Q, R and T . . . . .
If there are deviations from policy, point them out.
You should demand an explanantion and immediate meeting to resolve the matter and, if your conduct is out of line from their perspective, you want a clear statement of why your conduct is out of line and what changes will rememdy the problem. Point out that the company has an obligation to deal with you in good faith and they cannot merely screw with you without consequence. Be sure to follow any policies with regard to who gets the letter, etc.
See how that plays. If you get a reaction that says "Oh wow we need to fix this" that also passes the smell test, you can see how it plays out. If not, prepare for war and I would show up to the meeting with my lawyer in tow. The message has to be: "I have worked for you in good faith and
done a great job; you have no right to question my conduct after all this time without cause; you have to spell it out and provide a remedy; and I will not take this lying down."
Any remedy that is offered must be adhered to strictly and you will forever be looking over your shoulder.
In any case, if you are willing to take on this fight, people must see that you will stop at nothing to be vindicated.
You can contact your state's labor board or commission to see if they have a complaint process you can begin.
As you can see this could become a real cat fight, take a
long time and cost alot of money. You may be in the right, but you should count the cost to yourself in seeking justice. It will be a tough road.
If the company is convinced that: 1) you are not going away; 2) you are going to raise hell and tell everyone; 3) it will likely cost more money to deal with you than it would to settle with you; and 4) your performance will not likely change as a result of the dispute; than they will make a
business decision and leave you alone.
In any case, do not delay seeking work elsewhere.
These are some ideas. Feel free to follow up with additional questions.
For your information, the pros and cons of the types of dispute resolution methods follows.
GOOD LUCK!
Arbitration, Mediation, and Litigation
Arbitration: the referral of a dispute to one or more impartial persons for final and binding determination outside of the judicial system
Benefits of Arbitration:
Confidential, no public record
Limited exchange of documentation, information
Quick, don't have to wait for a court date
Arbitrators have expertise in the subject matter and are trained in conflict resolution
Cheaper than litigation
Preserves business relationships
Negatives of Arbitration
It's a compromise, no %100 winner
Complex arbitration can be costly
If not satisfied, may litigate the arbitration procedure
Poor results with an unskilled arbitrator
Both parties must agree to cooperate in the process
Mediation: the process by which parties submit their dispute to a neutral third party (the mediator) who works with the parties to reach a settlement of their dispute.
Benefits of Mediation:
Neutral mediator can objectively suggest alternatives not considered before
Parties are directly engaged in negotiating the settlement
Can be quicker than litigation
Less costly than litigation
Preserves business relationships
85% of American Arbitration Association cases mediated find successful solutions
Negatives of Mediation
may not reach a binding decision
unskilled mediator
Litigation: using the judicial system to resolve disputes
Benefits of litigation:
a clear winner and loser
uses a prescribed set of procedures
more predictable outcomes
is final
Negatives of Litigation:
waiting for court dates can do more harm
usually more expensive than mediation and arbitration
part of the public record
