Law.com
  • News
    • Newswire
    • Supreme Court
    • International
    • Legal Blog Watch
    • The Hot Seat
    • Video
  • Publications
    • The American Lawyer
    • Corporate Counsel
    • Law Technology News
    • The National Law Journal
    • New York Law Journal
    • New Jersey Law Journal
    • Connecticut Law Tribune
    • The Legal Intelligencer (PA)
    • Daily Business Review (FL)
    • Delaware Law Weekly
    • Daily Report (GA)
    • The Recorder (CA)
    • Texas Lawyer
    • Publication E-Alerts
    • More Publication Sites
  • Legal Research & Directories
    • Books Online
    • Smart Litigator
    • ALM Experts
    • Verdict Search
    • Court Reporters
    • Legal Dictionary
    • LegalTech® Directory
    • Newsletters
    • More Directories
  • Surveys, Lists & Rankings
    • Amlaw 100
    • NLJ 250
    • Global 100
    • The A-List
    • ALM Legal Intelligence
    • Surveys
    • More Lists & Rankings
  • Special Reports
  • lawjobs.com
  • LawCatalog Store
  • CLE & Events
    • CLE Center
    • ALM Events
    • LegalTech
    • Virtual LegalTech
    • Insight Legal Events
    • Webinars
Home
 
Article
Twitter LinkedIn RSS
Sign Up for Newsletters

Law.com Home > When Is Termination the Right Step to Take?

Font Size: increase font decrease font

When Is Termination the Right Step to Take?

By Michael P. Maslanka All Articles 

Texas Lawyer

November 29, 2012

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 


image: Eyewire

The toughest decision that lawyers, in-house or otherwise, help clients make is whether to impose the employment-law equivalent of capital punishment: termination of an employee. While clients look to attorneys for counsel, sometimes they really want us to make the decision -- for that cup to pass from them. Here are five questions to ask to ensure the decision is the right one at the right time.

No. 1: Is it a game of "gotcha" at work? Difficult employees are everywhere. Perhaps they should be terminated. But sometimes problem employees are terminated for minor or trivial reasons. So, when operations comes to the lawyer and says, "Now, we finally have a reason to get rid of this employee," counsel needs to put the brakes on the decision-making train.

Why? The manager may not be terminating the employee for a good reason. Rather, the manager's statement suggests that he may have a problem employee but he has not bothered to counsel him adequately on his performance. The manager conveniently sees a minor infraction as a way to make an end run around the task of laying the proper groundwork for a clean termination.

No. 2: Is there a rush to judgment? There are things you know and things you only think you know. A lawyer at another firm told me about a case in which his client concluded that an employee with a checkered past -- let's call him John -- was a thief. When I asked why, he said that the client had a telephone conversation (not an eye-to-eye meeting) with someone -- let's call her Jane -- who blamed John for a theft. But it turns out that Jane had been terminated under suspicious circumstances and may have borne a grudge against John.

The lawyer really didn't know John was a thief. But the belief fit a preconceived view, and that was that. Here is a gut-check question: What solid and verifiable facts are there to support the belief that the employee (fill in the blank on the purported misconduct)? If the lawyer can't answer the question, then hit the stop button on termination.

No. 3: Is tunnel vision developing? Remember reading Les Miserables in high school? Inspector Javert was the detective who obsessively went after Jean Valjean. Or, more recently, the movie The Fugitive depicted Deputy Marshal Sam Gerard (played by Tommy Lee Jones) chasing Dr. Richard Kimble (played by Harrison Ford). Kimble yelled out, "I didn't kill my wife," to which Gerard famously replies, "I don't care."

While entertaining in fiction and film, tunnel vision is devastating in the workplace when making a termination decision. Here are the danger signs:

• focusing on the employee under investigation without looking at any contextual facts;

• laying all the blame for a problem on a particular employee without considering whether other employees also should be held accountable;

• deciding before hearing all the facts that the employee is guilty as charged; or

A browser or device that allows javascript is required to view this content.

Continue reading

  • 1
  • 2

Next



Subscribe to Texas Lawyer

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • Constangy, Brooks & Smith

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Texas Board of Legal Specialization

Key categories

    
  • Labor and Employment Law

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Court Officials Seek to Reform Process of Naming Acting Justices
    •      
  2. The 2013 Am Law 100
    •      
  3. Prolific ADA Plaintiff Faces Nemesis in Harassment Suit
    •      
  4. Lawyers Sanctioned Over Porn Lawsuits File Appeal
    •      
  5. Law for Laymen
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

Hiring Interns? Be Sure to Do It Right

ACC Weighs in on Arizona's In-House Pro Bono Rules

Ex-Dewey Partners Face New Foe in Firm's Bankruptcy

S&C Adds Linklaters Restructuring Partner in London
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Enron Sandbox Stirs Up Private Data, Again

LegalTech West Coast Wraps Up With Ethics, VC News

In Tricky Prosecutions, Judges Play Peacemakers

Ropers Majeski Tries to Re-Invent Itself
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fla. Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Lawsuit Names Missing Fla. Attorney for Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Summer Programs Still in a Drought

Lawyer Not Covered for Alleged Malpractice at Prior Firm
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Firm Takes Another Hit in Bid for 'Unconscionable' Fees

New York's Martin Act Faces Test in Challenge to 2005 Case

Castille Testifies in Favor of 'Civil Gideon' Funding

Workers' Comp Judges Can't Fight Rescinded Raise
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Advising Clients on Weather and the Workplace
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Texas Sues BP, Others Over Deepwater Oil Spill Disaster
  •      
    • Subscription Required

'Follow That Escapee!'

Judge Who Tossed Defense Counsel Accused of 'Partiality'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media