Angelus' Post; INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS: FAIRNESS IS KEY TO SUCCESS

The following are direct quotes taken from the HR Matters Monthly Newsletter and might raise an eyebrow or two.

"Decisions by the Supreme Court provide compelling reasons for employers to perform investigations. A good investigation can protect your organization, while a bad one can become an employee relations fiasco. If you follow the proper process, your investigations should result in the "right" decisions."

"Performed systematically, investigations can prevent potential morale problems, resolve efficiency problems, and prevent legal and financial losses. In short, a good investigation can help you make sound employment decisions. However, poorly conducted internal investigations often result in low morale, negative public relations, and litigation. Therefore, you should have a well-defined process to specify the circumstances in which you will conduct investigations and to help you make confident, fair decisions."

"The consequences of not performing an adequate investigation can be severe. Many employees file lawsuits alleging discrimination, harassment, or wrongful termination as the result of decisions based on inadequate investigations. In fact, both the complaining party and the accused wrongdoer may sue if an investigation was conducted in a shoddy manner or if a decision appears to be unfounded. Significantly, courts tend to punish employers that do not conduct thorough investigations. In addition, employee morale may suffer if employment decisions appear unfair or arbitrary because investigations are not thorough or objective. Most employees value fairness and will respect their employers' decisions if they are based on a structured investigative process."

"One way to keep the goals of an investigative process in focus is to visualize how your organization's procedures and decisions might be viewed in an outside forum, such as a local newspaper or court. You should be confident that your investigative process and decision would be considered fair if held up to public scrutiny."

"As a general rule, you should talk to any person who may have information that would either prove or disprove that the alleged conduct occurred."

"However, there may be times when the evidence is inconclusive and you cannot reach a determination. In these cases, you should not take action against either party. Placing blame where the truth cannot be determined may result in claims of wrongrul discharge, defamation, infliction of emotional distress, or retaliation."

Yes, indeed, the truth is out there!

Guy Fawkes' Post; IS IT ETHICAL TO WITHHOLD THE TRUTH? IS THAT BETTER THAN LYING?

Thanks to that mass e mail on 2-28, now I understand some things, and thanks to someone for getting me in this blog.

Sonnschein’s words on 9-11-05 tell a complete story, and there is good perception from 77Morpheus about the way some real criminals were treated and the worthlessness of company loyalty and the uselessness of the hotline when the company makes a bad decision and has to protect it.

I have some perception too and this is what I see happening, and its real obvious and it violates all ethical handling of a matter and a person by the company.

He won't be told, but Bob is gradually being removed from any jobs of importance and visibility, but still will have the grunt jobs of auditing and writing and invisible solving problems. It would be "inconvevient" for the company to have a convict in a visible position even though it was a false conviction. Is it ethical to withhold the truth? Is that better than lying?

He won't be told, but he will not be allowed to achieve anything because he is held to a different standard. Anything that would be recognized as an achievement in anybody else will be declared unimportant or kept invisible if achieved by him. It would be "uncomfortable" for the company to let a convicted criminal have that kind of visibility even if wrongly convicted. He will be just a resource to be exploited, but the only recognition and appreciation will come from his peers, and they are discouraged from doing it openly. He is the best we have when it comes to knowing things, but not when it comes to recognition except by his peers. Is it ethical to withhold the truth? Is that better than lying?

He won't be told, but he will not go to hq again. You know that management trick, to put a stain on somebody and then keep them out of sight because they are stained. To let him go to hq would require somebody to do something, but to keep him away nobody has to do anything. It is easier to do nothing than something, and doing nothing allows the company to stay in denial and rationalize that he brought something on himself. The company can't have Rose claim that she is "uncomfortable." In fact, doesn't management in head office try to avoid saying his name openly?. Is it ethical to withhold the truth? Is that better than lying?

Graham never stood up for anybody and now wants to put as much distance from Bob as possible. They would like nothing as much as to have Bob resign.

His bitterness does not show and that's good because he would be slammed for a bad attitude. You know that management trick, cause a person to have a bad attitude and then criticise them for having it.

His melancholy shows and sooner or later the the company can call that a bad attitude too. Is it ethical to damage somebody and then blame them for looking damaged?

They tell him to let it go and put it behind him, but you can not put something behind you today when you have to wake up to it tomorrow can you.

The company answer to another compliance report about this is scary

“The matters referred to in the callers allegation are closed. The Company can make no further comment on these issues without disclosing information that is confidential.”

You know how to make all this go away

Its not by doing anything worse to Bob its by reopening the matter and making the right decision. Doing something worse to Bob would make it all worse.

Angelus' Post; LET THERE BE LIGHT

I do hope the blog-members do not decide to back-shelve this issue or find themselves too occupied in their day-to-day lives to let it die.
One never knows whom the next innocent victim will be.....Could be any one of you at some time in the future. Hopefully, the company learned a valuable lesson from their stupidity and would not dare to make the same mistake again. Hopefully, none of you will find yourselves in this same position.
Should the heinous actions again occur, knowing there is support does make a difference. Makes facing each day a little more tolerable.

Robert does know who his friends are and who his enemies are, but still has no clue who has publicly voiced outrage in his defense. He does not want to know.

Perhaps some day, someone will be brave enough or feel secure enough to drop him a note and put a name to their pseudonym. It takes a strong person to stand up for what is right, even if it is done quietly.

Robert has aged many years in the last year, but this can be reversed.

Please do not let your respect for him be overshadowed, but continue to give light and voice to principle and what is right.
It is a very lonely place to be where there are burdens but nobody to help carry them.