The Seven Testing Panoramas

The Seven Testing Panoramas

The Seven tests provide quite an insight for assessing whether an employee has been disciplined or fired for the 'just cause'. For the first test, it states that the employer must have to issue a formal warning (either in black and white or orally) to the employee who is not performing up to the mark. However, the employee should have a second chance of any poor performance. As evident from the case of Frank, there is no proven evidence of a formal warning or disciplinary action against his conduct. However, being a part of HRM department, I would prefer to look for the archives about any previous negligence and warning letters. Moreover, there exists a chance that Frank has been issued with a warning orally.

The next question which arises is that was the boss' (supervisor in Frank's case) order should be in accordance with safe and efficient operation within an organization. As far as Frank's discharge is concerned, the first thing as specified from the scenario does not account for any careless behavior on occupational health and safety's behalf. The cause of Frank's dismissal was entirely based on his poor performance causing loss to the company. By the situation, Frank has been working recklessly for the last month. The supervisor order justifies this test because Frank's recklessness was causing operational losses. As far as my decision is concerned, instead of firing him, I would try to relocate him to any other similar machine in building B (say). Apart from that, I would try to figure out what were the causes for Frank's inattention.

In the third test, look whether management has investigated the cause before going through a strict administrative action or not? By thorough investigation, anyone can reach the outcome more efficiently and effectively without any havoc in organization. The best approach is to put the employee on suspension period and investigate the whole case completely. Once the employee is proved innocent, pay him/her for the time he had been on suspension. As for Frank's case, there is no description of proper investigation carried out by either supervisor or plant superintendent. Being HRM personnel, I would ask the disciplinary committee to investigate the case from Frank's, supervisor's and superintendent's perspective (if I am not in that committee). Take some notes on their formal statements. Ask Frank about what are the root ...