Plant Services - March 2008 - (Page 45)

Maye was fed up. She packed her personal belongings and told Wyatt that she was quitting, as of right now. A few weeks later, she sued Acme, claiming it owed her time-anda-half for the 15 therapy sessions because they represented an addition to her normal 40-hour work week. How could this situation have been avoided? Can a company dictate which practitioners an employee should be using? How much advance notice should be given if employees are needed to work beyond their normal quitting time? When is the off-work time required to fulfill a company mandate compensable? Was Maye truly obligated to work the extra shift? Can psychological stress be a work-related injury? An attorney says: An academician says: There are a couple of ways to view this problem. Could Wyatt have asked Maye to work OT on short notice? Probably yes. Was Maye wrong in walking out? Probably yes. Can Acme determine which therapist Maye saw? Probably yes, as they were paying the freight. Should she have been compensated for her therapist visits? Probably not. And so on. However, I don’t think any of this will help Acme’s bottom line, nor Maye. We should view the problem as part of a high-performance work system. The question here is how to complete the repairs and upgrades in the shortest amount of time and quickly get the line running again (and making money for Acme). Wyatt should have had an overall plan in place that should have included a contingency plan for people calling in sick. He should have cleared the plan with the employees involved, including Maye, to make sure that there were no glitches. If Maye said she could not be part of the contingency plan, then Wyatt would have had a couple of choices to make. He has to put someone else on the “to-call list” in case a worker isn’t available. He also has to decide whether Maye fits on the tech team. If long hours are required, as they often are on retooling projects, and Maye can’t work those hours, maybe Maye needs to be transferred to another job. Maye seems to be having some stress problems, so moving Maye to a less critical and less stressful position might benefit both Acme and Maye. Wyatt’s overall goal should be to cut the downtime on the line to a minimum – Acme can’t make any money if it isn’t producing any product. Get it down from 36 hours to 24 hours, then 18, then 12, etc. That requires a well-designed work system that Acme has yet to figure out. Professor Homer H. Johnson, Ph.D Loyola University Chicago (312) 915-6682 hjohnso@luc.edu March 2008 This scenario makes me wonder whether everyone at Acme leave their common sense at home each morning. An employer can make OT mandatory, but when there’s no union collective bargaining agreement with a contrary provision, employers need to use some common sense in selecting workers to work overtime. Wyatt surely should have observed that Maye was exhausted and selected someone else to work. He also could have exercised some human compassion and given Maye a pass so she could attend her daughter’s play. Doesn’t he have kids of his own, for heaven’s sake? Alternatively, he could have suggested that she find another worker to substitute for her on the following shift. Finally, he should have had the common courtesy to search for an employee to stand in for the absent worker when he first knew that employee would not report to work. What happened to the Golden Rule on Acme’s shop floor? Other than at the time of a pre-employment physical, an employer has no legal right to mandate which health care provider an employee uses. Even in that situation, the employee always can refuse and walk away from the potential employment. Under some state workers’ compensation laws, however, an employer might not be obligated to pay for treatment by a health care provider the employee selected. Even if an employee accedes to an employer’s request to consult a particular health care provider, the time spent driving to appointments and receiving treatment isn’t working time for which an employee must be paid. Working time is that time an employee expends in producing goods or delivering services on the company’s behalf. Psychological stress can be a work-related condition, but many states’ workers’ comp laws are extremely restrictive in recognizing psychological stress as a work-related injury. Julie Badel, partner Epstein Becker & Green, P.C (312) 499-1418 jbadel@ebglaw.com A corporate consultant says: There seems never to be enough resources to finish tasks and someone always gets the short straw. Even so, a good supervisor balances efficient project management and team performance. There are two reasons to be mindful of people’s need to recharge their batteries. First, they don’t quit because of compensation and work hours; they leave because of poor supervisor behaviors and because they don’t feel valued. The second reason is that their wellbeing needs relief from onthe-job stress. Otherwise, they get fatigued, less productive, accident prone; which leads to poor performance. 45 www.PLANTSERVICES.com http://www.PLANTSERVICES.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Plant Services - March 2008

Plant Services - March 2008 Contents From The Editor Letters The PS Files Up and Running Crisis Corner What Works Asset Manager: Enterprise Thinking Technology Toolbox: Hydrogen In Action Cover Story: Get Real Electrical: Reliable Distribution Power Transmission: When the Belt Breaks Web Hunter: Tooting Horns In the Trenches Product Picks Classifieds Fast Facts Energy Expert: Energy versus Sustainability

Plant Services - March 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.