Punishment


Workplace discipline walks a very fine line, especially in today’s society. More than ever before, as a society we are becoming aware of the discriminatory practices and taking action against them to ensure equality for all. In the last post, we talked about how to share the marbles. Similarly, how to discipline may affect how the “marbles” are distributed amongst the workplace. Take for example a young man who starts working for a company with a commission-based structure. He is outperforming everyone in the organization and in turn, receives compensation and rewards that pull away from the other workers’ pay. However, the audit staff one day finds out that the young man had been engaging in toxic business practices, terminating his employment contract. This would, therefore, restore the payment to other workers. Obviously, there are a lot of variables at play here but imagine the business was operating in one city with a fixed number of customers, businesses, and people.

On-campus, I work at The Red Lion which is a bar that specializes in selling liquor to college students. One of my good friends also worked alongside me, however, he got fired around a month ago. We both started working at the bar around the same time freshmen year, so it was pretty emotional to see him leave. We went through the entire training process together and met the entire staff through social events. He was fired for giving out a white claw without charging someone, which is definitely something he knew he shouldn’t have done. For those of you who don’t know, White Claws are hard-seltzers that the bar inventories and keeps good track of. They also turn a good profit on them, as they are sold for $6 and cost a fraction of the price. The manager took a horrible approach when firing him. Instead of going up and reminding him that he should charge people for the drinks, he fired him on the spot without warning. John had never had any past run-ins with this issue so it came as a shock that he would get canned so easily. Generally, the manager would give out a few warnings if your sales were low or saw you do something that was against the workplace conduct. This brings up questions as to whether the relationship between John and the manager that night was not in good standing. Within the workplace, I see a lot of favoritism at play that allows people to give away liquor even if the manager is aware. They are also able to get certain shifts more frequently that are of higher demand. I believe John was fired for something so petty due to their poor relationship.

I think implementing more team building within the workplace would allow for these situations to be non-existent. Ensuring that there were relationships formed outside of the workplace would allow for a more streamlined and efficient business environment. People work harder when they like the person they are performing for and receive praise. These kinds of punishments are not effective as it creates fear within the workplace. Bartenders may be slower to serve and more careful when ringing in drinks not to make a mistake. This could in turn cause profits to decrease and less of a crowd to come due to slower service. Rather, bringing it up with the employee in the wrong a few times would be the better option, aka three strikes and you’re out.

I had the chance to talk with John after he received his discipline and found him quite distressed. It wasn’t good for his mental health or his current job search. I feel bad that he now has to find another job on campus to make money that contributes towards his education all because he made one small mistake. This kind of punishment doesn’t work and is a bit cruel to the employees who give full effort for years at the business. One small slip up doesn’t warrant such a harsh punishment.




Comments

  1. There are some inconsistencies in this story or, at a minimum, a lack of maturity on John's part. Could he have anticipated how things would go if he lost the job? If so, why then break the rules in that one instance? That wasn't explained. Possible explanations are that he had actually done it several times but hadn't previously been caught, or it was more common among all the bartenders than was otherwise indicated. You did say that "favorites" of the manager could give away drinks with the manager's full awareness. If so, does it mean that other bartenders were giving away drinks as well, though out of view? And if that was happening might the manager have used John as an example for the others?

    Then you said business might drop off with a change in bartender behavior, after John was let go. I can't assess whether that was true or not, but let's say it is and the manager knew that. Is there then a different reason to consider why John was fired? What I have in mind is something like this. The manager actually preferred not to know about bartenders giving away drinks, but in this case he did know and as John wasn't one of his favorites the manger felt his hand was forced. Hard discipline was needed in this case for that reason. Again, I have no way of knowing if this is close to the truth, but it might be worth considering what happened from a different point of view.

    So the last part of the story that you should clarify is how the manager found out about this incident. That might matter in what happened after that. The way you told the story, it wasn't important how the manager found out. That's hard for me to believe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Professor Arvan,

      I completely agree with you that there was a lack of maturity on John's part. He knew exactly how things would be for him if he lost the job. However, he never realized that he was doing anything wrong since it had become a norm at the bar to give drinks away. It was the fact that almost every bartender had given drinks away that led him down the path he regrets deeply. The manager definitely used John to set an example for the rest of the employees not to give away liquor and especially beer away.

      Referring to your point on whether the manger knew that his action would result in a decline of business, I believe that the manger knew that he could replace John after a month or so. The drop is business would not have mattered to him, since he has no real stake in the company. Furthermore, they would not be able to trace back a loss of profits due to his actions, as there are too many moving parts to the bar already. So the firing of John was more for his personal agenda than from a business perspective.

      The manager found out about it because he clearly saw John give away a beer on the camera. He then went upstairs from the basement where the camera room is and checked his register to see if he had rung it in. After finding out that John had neglected to charge his friend for a White Claw, he fired him on the spot.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Organizations : Football

Connecting the Dots

Conflict