Hi,
Kindly help me to get out of this dilemma. One of our good performers, Mr. X, is under suspicion for badmouthing. There is no evidence against him, but the CEO suspects that he is spreading negative remarks about the company among other employees. Ours is a small-to-medium-sized business in the IT industry with 40 employees, and it's a very close-knit family. This person had written an article on a company event in a highly sarcastic tone on his personal blog two years before I joined the company. Since then, the CEO has been skeptical of all his actions. No action was taken after the blog incident, but now each time some harsh comments appear in the suggestion box, the CEO is pointing fingers at X, citing that X is good at English (in general, other employees are weak).
I have tried my best to make the CEO understand, but in vain. In all company events, X actively participates and helps organize things. However, there was an instance when X came to me and openly discussed many issues in the company. Some issues were genuine, and we took action on them, while some were completely out of context, which, in my understanding, were made due to X's immaturity and his dislike towards the company owners. I spoke to him and tried to mentor him. X joined us as a fresher and has 2 years of experience. In the past year, two HR consultants have visited our company. According to one, no action can be taken without evidence. The other says it's an attitude issue, and such issues cannot be corrected, so it is better to terminate the person. The CEO also wants the person to be terminated.
If I terminate him without any evidence, I am concerned if this may cause any legal hassles. Please help.
From India, Cochin
4Kindly help me to get out of this dilemma. One of our good performers, Mr. X, is under suspicion for badmouthing. There is no evidence against him, but the CEO suspects that he is spreading negative remarks about the company among other employees. Ours is a small-to-medium-sized business in the IT industry with 40 employees, and it's a very close-knit family. This person had written an article on a company event in a highly sarcastic tone on his personal blog two years before I joined the company. Since then, the CEO has been skeptical of all his actions. No action was taken after the blog incident, but now each time some harsh comments appear in the suggestion box, the CEO is pointing fingers at X, citing that X is good at English (in general, other employees are weak).
I have tried my best to make the CEO understand, but in vain. In all company events, X actively participates and helps organize things. However, there was an instance when X came to me and openly discussed many issues in the company. Some issues were genuine, and we took action on them, while some were completely out of context, which, in my understanding, were made due to X's immaturity and his dislike towards the company owners. I spoke to him and tried to mentor him. X joined us as a fresher and has 2 years of experience. In the past year, two HR consultants have visited our company. According to one, no action can be taken without evidence. The other says it's an attitude issue, and such issues cannot be corrected, so it is better to terminate the person. The CEO also wants the person to be terminated.
If I terminate him without any evidence, I am concerned if this may cause any legal hassles. Please help.
From India, Cochin
I have a few questions. Rather than responding to the employee, why is the CEO trying to silence him? At your level, how far can you ensure that a similar situation wouldn't occur once you release him? Terminating an employee for defaming the employer would remain valid when the claims made by the employee have affected the employer with his revenue or social capital. How far has this blog affected the firm's revenue or even 'Employee Morale'? Please take a fresh look at the case and then decide on your course of action. Terminating the employee will breed fear among your existing employees and kill transparency.
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Hello,
Interesting but not a very uncommon situation!
When a competent employee talks harshly, it is normally for the larger good of the organization! No point in reacting to the harshness alone!
In this situation, your CEO may or may not be right, but the issue demands INTROSPECTION by the "powers that be"!
Also, I notice a certain absence of a "dialogue" and the reasons could be:
1) EGO of those who are custodians of the future of the organization.
2) Perhaps the said employee is speaking the TRUTH that hurts!
3) There is a fear of people knowing the truth!
At the same time, it is just possible that though competent at the job, the personality is careless with no regard for the protocol.
Terminating the employee's services is the LAST option that can be resorted to at any point in time.
How about taking the employee in confidence, encouraging him to contribute to the development of a sound and transparent organization in real terms instead of simply badmouthing! I suspect he is seeking attention! Be kind. If his remarks, observations, and suggestions are GOOD for the organization when looked at dispassionately, objectively, and rationally, the organization has to be receptive.
Just because you don't like the package, do not throw away the valuable contents!
The case calls for counseling, reforming (as it were), and involving him in the mainstream.
While the organization must be receptive, it must be stated in categorical terms and firmly that IRRESPONSIBLE conduct SHALL meet an appropriate response. Value additions are welcome and could even be rewarded, but the PROTOCOL of decent and dignified conduct is unavoidable! These points must be driven home through counseling, and in the last resort, we can never lose sight of the fact that the organization will always remain supreme, and no individual member can be greater than the organization!
Respond to these inputs if you need to make any observations or have more queries!
Regards,
Samvedan
July 17, 2013
From India, Pune
Interesting but not a very uncommon situation!
When a competent employee talks harshly, it is normally for the larger good of the organization! No point in reacting to the harshness alone!
In this situation, your CEO may or may not be right, but the issue demands INTROSPECTION by the "powers that be"!
Also, I notice a certain absence of a "dialogue" and the reasons could be:
1) EGO of those who are custodians of the future of the organization.
2) Perhaps the said employee is speaking the TRUTH that hurts!
3) There is a fear of people knowing the truth!
At the same time, it is just possible that though competent at the job, the personality is careless with no regard for the protocol.
Terminating the employee's services is the LAST option that can be resorted to at any point in time.
How about taking the employee in confidence, encouraging him to contribute to the development of a sound and transparent organization in real terms instead of simply badmouthing! I suspect he is seeking attention! Be kind. If his remarks, observations, and suggestions are GOOD for the organization when looked at dispassionately, objectively, and rationally, the organization has to be receptive.
Just because you don't like the package, do not throw away the valuable contents!
The case calls for counseling, reforming (as it were), and involving him in the mainstream.
While the organization must be receptive, it must be stated in categorical terms and firmly that IRRESPONSIBLE conduct SHALL meet an appropriate response. Value additions are welcome and could even be rewarded, but the PROTOCOL of decent and dignified conduct is unavoidable! These points must be driven home through counseling, and in the last resort, we can never lose sight of the fact that the organization will always remain supreme, and no individual member can be greater than the organization!
Respond to these inputs if you need to make any observations or have more queries!
Regards,
Samvedan
July 17, 2013
From India, Pune
Dear Bharath,
I am in complete agreement with the views of Samvedan and Cite Contribution. From your own statement, it is very clear that barring the comment posted by him on his personal blog, every other thing seems to me out of vague suspicion and pure surmise of your CEO. Even the comment on his personal blog two years ago, before your joining, had a sarcastic "tone" - that's all. You are not sure whether the comment itself was sarcastic! From your narrative about his behavior and outlook, X seems to me a little bit extroverted and outspoken.
What sort of person is your CEO? Very sensitive to criticism, even if it is right? Whether his management style is employee-friendly or just result-oriented with ruthlessness? Forget about the origin - whether the "bad things" allegedly spread by someone could at least be remotely related to the ongoings in the company? That's what Samvedan meant by "introspection". When the mighty management decides to get rid of an unwanted employee, the exit could be very simple, if not ignominious.
During my initial training as a directly recruited Labour Officer, I heard a senior officer citing a judgment of the Supreme Court (sorry, now I am not able to recollect the exact citation due to the efflux of time). I remember being told that the Court, in its 16-page judgment relating to that particular case of wrongful dismissal of an employee which was set aside consistently by all the lower forums, scolded the management in the entire breadth of its judgment but finally mentioned in the operative portion that it cannot order an unwilling employer to take back an unwanted employee into its service but fixed a hefty monetary compensation together with costs.
So, if possible, talk to your CEO at the most opportune time and suggest politely to ignore such petty things emanating from mere suspicions and consider the retention of X, and at the same time, better advise X to behave properly as expected by the CEO, else try his luck somewhere else and not be a misfit in your company.
Lastly, about the legality of the exit of X as desired by your CEO, Law is the consummation of morality and actions. If both are at tandem, no problem! Otherwise, tell your CEO, it will be hell, notwithstanding the fact that IT employees have tremendous scope for employment, and that's the reason for their not fighting back.
From India, Salem
I am in complete agreement with the views of Samvedan and Cite Contribution. From your own statement, it is very clear that barring the comment posted by him on his personal blog, every other thing seems to me out of vague suspicion and pure surmise of your CEO. Even the comment on his personal blog two years ago, before your joining, had a sarcastic "tone" - that's all. You are not sure whether the comment itself was sarcastic! From your narrative about his behavior and outlook, X seems to me a little bit extroverted and outspoken.
What sort of person is your CEO? Very sensitive to criticism, even if it is right? Whether his management style is employee-friendly or just result-oriented with ruthlessness? Forget about the origin - whether the "bad things" allegedly spread by someone could at least be remotely related to the ongoings in the company? That's what Samvedan meant by "introspection". When the mighty management decides to get rid of an unwanted employee, the exit could be very simple, if not ignominious.
During my initial training as a directly recruited Labour Officer, I heard a senior officer citing a judgment of the Supreme Court (sorry, now I am not able to recollect the exact citation due to the efflux of time). I remember being told that the Court, in its 16-page judgment relating to that particular case of wrongful dismissal of an employee which was set aside consistently by all the lower forums, scolded the management in the entire breadth of its judgment but finally mentioned in the operative portion that it cannot order an unwilling employer to take back an unwanted employee into its service but fixed a hefty monetary compensation together with costs.
So, if possible, talk to your CEO at the most opportune time and suggest politely to ignore such petty things emanating from mere suspicions and consider the retention of X, and at the same time, better advise X to behave properly as expected by the CEO, else try his luck somewhere else and not be a misfit in your company.
Lastly, about the legality of the exit of X as desired by your CEO, Law is the consummation of morality and actions. If both are at tandem, no problem! Otherwise, tell your CEO, it will be hell, notwithstanding the fact that IT employees have tremendous scope for employment, and that's the reason for their not fighting back.
From India, Salem
Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.