KEY POINTS:
One of the most difficult tasks a manager can face is firing an employee. It can be stressful and legally difficult. The key is to make sure the processes you have gone through are fair and make sure you have investigated the situation properly.
David Doyle, New
Zealand manager of executive recruitment firm Tanner Menzies, says one of the keys to letting someone go is that it must never come as a surprise to them.
"If a person is surprised by this news there are all sorts of problems, not least legal issues and procedures that have not been adhered to.
"It is important that you encourage regular and open communication in your workplace."
Doyle says good management is about addressing performance-based issues as they arise.
"Think of how you deal with children - you don't take their PlayStation away if you haven't warned them that their behaviour is not acceptable. It's about people knowing the consequences and there being no surprises."
Doyle says there are usually two reasons to ask someone to leave the organisation: there may have been gross misconduct, such as an employee caught stealing, or there are performance issues.
"Staff need to know what's construed by the company as gross misconduct. Theft is an obvious one; spending time looking at inappropriate sites on the internet would be another. When firing someone for this sort of misconduct, ranking in the workplace should have nothing to do with it.
"It doesn't matter if it's your top salesman or a manager with many years in the business - if the person has committed an offence, that person must go."
With performance-based sackings, previous performance is relevant, Doyle says.
"Perhaps an employee hasn't made target this month but has been a high achiever for the past few months. That person does need to be spoken to but it needs to be taken in context.
"This is an area where many inexperienced managers fail."
Doyle stresses that just because someone has been asked to leave one organisation, it doesn't mean he or she can't be a star in another one. "Recruiters need to find out why someone was fired before they make a decision."
"An example would be, say, someone who works in an aggressive sales environment and loses their job because they don't sell enough mortgages. This person could be ideal, for, say, an account management role where the focus is on building relationships, managing the account and there is less of an emphasis on meeting aggressive sales targets."
Doyle's advice for employees who know that the role may not be working out is to consider leaving before being asked.
He says a good employer will leave the door open. "It's about leaving someone a bridge to cross over. The outcome is still that the person goes but it takes away a lot of the pain. Make sure the employee has every opportunity to make the decision on her/his own volition. Point to the bridge."
Someone who thinks there should never be a need to fire someone is Andrea Thompson, director of Catapult, a business performance consultancy in Wellington. She says if a company has good leadership, employees know what's expected of them.
"Often firing comes from a failure in coaching or feedback. Good leaders avoid having to fire someone by being clear of what's expected at all times and never getting to the stage where employees are not supported."
EMA Legal senior solicitor Jo Douglas says if a manager wants to fairly dismiss someone for an issue of misconduct, that employee must be given details of the allegation before the manager meets with him/her.
"There must be a real opportunity for the employee to explain or refute the allegation."
The manager must give an unbiased consideration of the explanation and the employee should have the opportunity to have a support person or representative at meetings.
"The manager should also be open with the employee about what is being investigated and the evidence that has been gathered."
Once that's been done, and the manager has heard from the employee, the manager is able to make a decision.
Douglas says there is a big distinction between misconduct and performance issues.
"When you're dealing with performance, there are different processes. It takes longer and can be more difficult."
Firstly, the employee needs to be told clearly what the problem is. "Give clear information about what they can do to improve their performance. Also, the person must be given enough time to improve."
"Consider support for the employee. All remedial steps must be exhausted and the employee must have sufficient, clear warnings."
"It is important that all the contractual requirements are met. There may be a decision to give pay in lieu of notice. There are ways of organising the exit."
When it comes to redundancies, Douglas says staff have to first be consulted. "The employer has a proposal to restructure - this must be put to staff and they must be allowed to put forward their views."
"The company is expected to keep an open mind during the consultation period." Douglas has known instances, though not many, where companies have decided against redundancies after consultation.
Mark Harcourt, professor of strategy and human resource management at the Waikato Management School, says the person must be made clear of what he or she is being accused of.
They must have time to seek advice.
"If the offence is serious, the person can be suspended with pay."
Harcourt says employers have to make sure that they tread the legal path carefully or they could face serious legal action.
"Procedural unfairness awards collect $6000 on average," he says.
When it comes to firing for performance issues, 70 per cent of employees who go to court win. As far as misconduct is concerned, about 50 per cent of employees win.
"Sometimes this means reimbursement of wages in addition to the procedural unfairness award. It can get really expensive."
