Napier, MscNewsWire, Monday 30 May 2016 - The growth in just a few years of the industry centred on aggrieved employees in the productive sector has outstripped any growth in this now extremely vulnerable sector.In this second in our series we pinpoint the danger of management failing to take seriously even the most trivial of such episodes. There must be in place a defined and simple pathway, a checklist, to escalate any such flare-up.......Pathway: Within at least one hour and regardless of the circumstances, the foreman, leading hand, or other responsible person must inform senior management of the incident regardless of their own interpretation of the severity of the episode.

The production official must clearly describe, while it is still in their memory, to senior management:  1. The form that the incident took i.e. visible antagonism by one or several parties, sullen response, intended or inadvertent insolence, attitude. They must impart the exchange of words that constituted the episode. Who said what to who?  2. The senior manager, ideally the person in charge of manufacturing, having reviewed this summary from the foreman must then as soon as possible contact the other party, the one likely to become a complainant.  3. The factory manager must then make the decision as to whether the incident has run its course or is likely to be the cause of subsequent arbitration or legal action. The manufacturing manager must exercise precise judgement here because:-

  a) If they appear over-attentive to what might only be a trivial matter, it might transform an otherwise trivial incident into something actionable.  b) If they appear to take the incident lightly, then the person concerned might become determined to embark upon proceedings designed to emphasise what they might believe is its significance in their eyes.  c) The manufacturing manager must assess the incident in terms of it becoming actionable. This means that they must ask themselves this question: Were this incident to become known by an interested third party such as a lawyer or employment consultant would it lead to further action?

  4. The manufacturing manager must veer onto the cautious side and conclude that if the potential complainant deems it worthy of further consideration then the matter will be placed before a formal meeting and this should be done sooner rather than later.  5. A full meeting should now be convened involving the union representative and the complainant. At such a meeting there should be measures to draw any lingering sting to prevent the incident maturing into something actionable. At this stage the foreman or other second party should not be involved.  6. On 3,4&5 there must a full formal paper trail procedure that demonstrates the company’s attentiveness to the incident, and determination to resolve it to the satisfaction of the actual or potential complainant. The purpose is make it clear in any subsequent process that the company has taken the incident seriously and has weighed it against all its established – and officially approved -procedures.

From the MSCNewsWire reporters' deskThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.