Project work: Analysisof an organizational eventRefusing to follow areasonable requestDas, AnindaThe achievement anddisappointment of a business is reliant after guaranteeing that employees aredoing what is expected of them and that they are conforming to directions givento them by their boss. It is a test for any business to manage an employee whobasically won’t follow directions and it is vital to have the capacity toseparate between bearings that one can sensibly ask for workers to conform toand those which might be esteemed to be absurd 1.An important part of any businesscontract is the verifiable obligation for employees to do a legal and sensibledirection from their boss. A standout amongst the most majorattributes of a business relationship, many employees are ignorant thatneglecting to take instructions from their boss can constitute ‘Misconduct’ atwork, which can possibly bring about a disciplinary action 2.What is a Reasonable Request?Under custom-based law, workershave an inferred obligation of submission and collaboration in their agreementof business. Employees along these lines have an obligation to comply with abusiness’ directions, in as much as they are legal and sensible 1.The sensibility of the business’ directionwill rely on the conditions of every individual case. When mulling over whethera request is sensible, one should consider the idea of the work that anemployee does, the terms of the agreement of business, standard practices and the typical course ofmanaging between the gatherings.
Examples of how an employee could sensibly decline a Legal andSensible Direction: 1 Employee not playing out their part and obligations as expressed in theworker’s business contract; Employee declining to take after organization strategies or systems; Employee proceeding to act in an absurd route in spite of being advisednot to.An employee can’t be required totake after a business’ order if 3: a) it is not in accordance tolaw; b) it is outside thecapabilities, capacity or range of abilities of the employee; c) completing such an order wouldmake genuine or inevitable hazard to the wellbeing or security of the employeeor others involved.Refusing to follow a Reasonable RequestA gross disobedience or thewilful refusal to take after a sensible administration guideline is misconduct.Notwithstanding, so as to legitimize dismissal a business should first becompletely sure that the request being issued is in actuality a sensible one. Abusiness might also have the capacity to legitimize expulsion if first theyhave directed a reasonable and successful disciplinary process with the workerbeing referred to before achieving that choice to dismiss 4.Cases leading to employee dismissal for failing to follow areasonable request: In Powell v Hunter Water Corporation 5 the business summarily dismissed a worker forneglecting to take after a reasonable work direction to take his faulty auto tobe promptly overhauled.
Rather, he kept on heading to and from occupations forrest of the day. In Burns v Sacred Heart Mission Inc. 6 the business fired the employee on the premise that shehad occupied with genuine unfortunate behaviour by neglecting to go to aplanned medical evaluation without sensible clarification, and by neglecting toconform to written instructions to go to meetings on three separate dates.
As always, an effectivecommunication structure within business is always vital in these types ofissues. An effective downward as well as upward communication will aid to avoidsuch circumstances leading to employees refusing a reasonable request andsubsequent disciplinary procedures 7.Source – Dr.
Hugo Gaggiotti’s presentation slideSome effective ways to improveupward communication will be a) grievance procedure; b) open-door policy; c) counsellingand attitude questionnaires. Hence, declining to complete animmediate request can be a reason for dismissal. But before any move is made,HR leaders of the company ought to guarantee that organization approachesclarify what constitutes disobedience and ensure occurrences are documented 8.
Star footballer refusing a reasonablerequestThis alludes to theasserted refusal of the Manchester City player Carlos Tevez to play againstBayern Munich. An employee is and shallalways be an employee irrespective of their stardom or importance to theorganization or team 9.Should a worker neglect totake after a sensible and legal guideline by the business in the workenvironment, it is probably going to add up to a rupture of agreement. An employer should attemptand resolve it casually; however in the event that the employee still won’tco-work, it should be managed as a disciplinary or capacity matter, contingenton the conditions.
The arrangement will, ifessential, need to take after its disciplinary methods.The aim of this project is toread and analyze a real life case study on ‘Refusing to follow a reasonablerequest’.The case involves an UK postalservices company employee refusing to follow a reasonable request by his reportingmanager10.
The name ofcompany and employees has been changed in order to maintain dataconfidentiality.This report presents the detailsof the case and the subsequent steps to be followed by Tim – the OperationsManager.Case study – Refusing to follow a Reasonable RequestBackground facts – Part AOn 3rd March, employeeX refused a reasonable request by his Manager to move from one area of work toanother.
At the time, the employee felt that he was doing the work that he hadsigned for and that he should not be asked to move. Despite an explanationabout why he needed to move work areas from his manager, he continued to refusethe request. They have held two informal discussions on the same issue in theprevious six weeks reminding employee X of the need to work as required.What should Tim – as Operations Manager do at this initial stage?The first stage is to giveemployee X some time to calm down and reflect on the request.
Employee X was given 10 minutesto reconsider and reflect on his refusal to work as required. He was alsoencouraged to speak to his union representative. Ten minutes later, the Timalongwith employee X’s manager called the employee into an office to see if the’cooling off’ period has been useful and whether employee X is now willing tomove to the new work area (the lobby) to meet the workflow deadline. Employee Xstill refuses to move area and says there is a lot of work on the mech to do.The manager explains that his machine is being closed for the evening and extrasupport is needed on the lobby.This is not the first timeemployee X has refused to change work areas. He claims that he has signed forand trained to work on the mech and should not be asked to do work in any otherarea. The manager asks him if there are any physical reasons why he is unableto work on the lobby.
Employee X says ‘NO’ but says he is not trained. Themanager has previously explained that everyone needs to be flexible and work inthe area required to maintain timescales.Background facts – Part BEmployee X is unwilling to moveas he says it’s been years since he has worked on the other work area and hesays he has not had the proper training to work on the outward lobby.Employee X protests about moving,he says he is settled in to a routine and has his area set up, he mentions thatthe machines are cleared and any jams are sorted promptly, limiting the timethey are not working. He says that the area clears because of all of hisefforts.
Tim wants to make sure that he isnot being unreasonable by his request, he is convinced that he has seenemployee X working on the outward lobby over the last few months. He tellsemployee X that he is going to get back to him.What does Tim need to investigate to allow him to determine whetherthere is a case to answer?The next stage us for Tim tocheck whether employee X has had training to work on the lobby. He will need tocheck training records as well as speaking to the manager in the lobby area tounderstanding whether it supports what employee X is saying.
The manager confirms thatemployee X has been trained on the lobby and confirms that employee X hasworked on the lobby every weekend over the last 4 weeks.Tim also contacts a few of theother employees who work on the lobby at the same time as employee X and askwhether he works with them, They both confirm that he does.If employee X claims to have notraining on the lobby, Tim will need to show employee X that he has listened tohis concerns and has investigated the following: n Evidenceof the signing on sheet at the lobby.n Whocan confirm that employee X not only is trained but regularly works on thearea?n Statementfrom the manager and the employees.
Background facts – Part CHaving concluded hisinvestigations, Tim has obtained witness statements from a manager and witnesscomments from other employees that confirms that employee X performs the firsthour of his overtime on the outward lobby at the weekend and the manager confirmsemployee X has had all of the required training to do his job safely.How should Tim treat the matter – is there a conduct case for employeeX to answer?It appears there is a case toanswer here and so this should be progressed formally. Employee X haspreviously been informally informed of the need to work flexibly, yet stillrefuses to move areas even after the manager had given him the cooling offperiod. He has been given an explanation why it is important that he moves workareas and has decided not to follow it.
Tim seeks guidance from HRdepartment as to the correct procedure to follow when progressing the matterand starting conduct proceedings.Tim arranges a fact findingmeeting with employee X giving him the opportunity to attend with his unionrep. Fact Finding MeetingsThe manager shouldundertake a prompt and detailed investigation of the facts of the suspectedmisconduct.Where there areinvestigations under other policies, evidence may include: An executive summary where a Security investigation is taking place.
A Grievance file can form part of the fact finding investigation.Before the fact-finding meetingThe manager should Arrange a meeting with the employee to establish the facts of theincident. Examine relevant documents of the incident. Copy any relevant documents to be shared with the employee during themeeting.During the meetingThe manager should Explain the purpose of the meeting to establish what happened and why ithappened.
Establish and clarify the facts. Listen carefully to the explanation from the employee. Make notes, inform the employee what the next steps are and theassociated timescales.After the meetingThe manager should Consider whether witnesses need to be interviewed.
The case is heard. Tim outlinesthe background to the case and all of Tim’s points are considered, no newevidence is brought to the meeting by employee X or his representative.Tim also checks whether there areany other factors that are stopping employee X from working on the lobby, thisincludes asking about issues with other employees.
Employee X says that none ofthose issues apply to him.If so, what will be the draft for conduct notification and what shouldbe considered as appropriate penalty?For the potential penalty, arange of penalties within the authority of the first line manager can beconsidered.One option is a warning whichremains on employee X’s conduct record for 12 months, for failing to follow areasonable instruction to move from one work area (the mech) to another (thelobby) as the standards discussed in the two informal discussions did not leadto an improvement in behaviour.ConclusionHence, the objective for abusiness is to have already given composed mandates, disciplinary notices and alast cautioning with notice of conceivable end before terminating an employee.Managers ought to specifically statethat inability to complete direct and reasonable requests from supervisors mayconstitute reason for termination.As in this case, Tim concludesafter going through various evidences that employee X has indeed failed toperform and adhere to a reasonable request made by his supervisor and henceamongst other possible penalties liable for a warning letter.Conduct Code Flowchart