Plant Services - August 2008 - (Page 52) IN THE TRENCHES The scenario presented here is based on a true story; only the names have been changed to protect the innocent. Love at First Sight Acme learns about dancing on employees’ mating habits he Acme operation is a 100-person manufacturing plant, part of a larger, privately held, London-based organization owned and operated by Sir Buford Nashua Conklin Acme III, the most socially conservative tycoon in the history of capitalism. Dan Saband was hired as a production engineer five years ago by Les Wallz, the plant director. By virtue of three years of dedicated hard work and his charismatic personality, but mainly because of some fortuitous retirements, Dan found himself promoted to production manager. His duties now included supervising the day-shift crew. About a year ago, Sir Buford became so displeased with the lack of revenue from this facility, he threatened to close it. Les contracted Sara Bond, a part-time, self-employed marketing consultant, hoping she could jump-start the sales needed to quiet the old man down a bit. It was inevitable that Dan and Sara would meet sooner or later, and they began dating a few weeks later. At a small plant, everyone knows everyone else’s business. Soon, the buzz around the facility was that Sara was pregnant. Les asked Dan if the rumor was true. Dan said that Sara wasn’t pregnant. Les warned that an out-of-wedlock pregnancy would be a problem. Dan could make his assertion because he knew that Sara had miscarried about a week earlier. During the next few months, Les approached Dan and Sara several times, complaining that their lack of discretion was ruining the morale of the other employees. Each time, Les admonished them to be more discreet. Les said he feared that Sir Buford was already highly displeased – his underlying conservatism made that a certainty – and Sir Buford had already heard from neighbors complaining about the lunchtime Tai Chi lessons in the parking lot, the employees who came to work on “noisy” motorcycles, and the “hippie freaks” assigned to grounds work and building maintenance. He already threatened a shutdown because of the plant’s lack of profitability. But, Dan urged Les to hire Sara as a full-time employee, subject to a three-month trial period, to develop a new ad campaign to keep Sir Buford happy. After Sara started, she and Dan announced their engagement. The tension between Dan and Les flared up again when two production workers complained about Dan’s management style and his behavior. They issued Les an ultimatum: Either Dan 52 T leaves or they leave. When Les couldn’t give them a straight answer immediately, they placed their ID cards on the desk, left the office, emptied their lockers and walked out. Les conferred with the plant’s executive team, which supported the decision to terminate Dan. When he was informed of his fate, he and Sara went to Les’s office to learn why he was being fired. Les claimed to be uncomfortable with Dan’s ability to supervise workers effectively. Les also terminated Sara, saying Acme no longer needed her services. Sara then told Les that she had a miscarriage just three weeks ago and that she suffered another one the previous year. Dan and Sara sued Acme, claiming that they’d been discriminated against because of their intimate relationship, and claimed a breach of contract and emotional distress, as well as discrimination based on an out-of-wedlock pregnancy. How could this situation have been avoided? Should an absentee owner’s belief system have any bearing on the “morality” of some backwater operation? Does an employer have a right to control what an employee does with his personal life? Should interoffice romances be regulated by company guidelines? What is appropriate conduct in the workplace when it comes to coworkers who are dating? Is a miscarriage a pregnancy? A corporate consultant says: Let’s look at the real problem, and then the obvious interpersonal relationship issue. Les Wallz could have been a August 2008 www.PLANTSERVICES.com http://www.PLANTSERVICES.com
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.