Feedback Required For Warning Letter For Misbehaviour With Senior

Dear Seniors,

Greetings for the day!

Today, one of our company employees refused to obey the instructions given to him by his immediate authority. Hence, our GM asked me to issue a warning letter to the concerned employee. I have drafted the letter with the help of citehr, which is as follows:

Date:

To

Mr. [Employee's Last Name],

SUBJECT: WARNING LETTER

Dear [Employee's Last Name],

This is to inform you that we have received a complaint against you regarding your involvement in improper behavior with a senior. You have not followed the instructions that were given to you by your immediate authority.

The above act is a serious misconduct and attracts strict disciplinary action against you.

Therefore, in your best interest, we are issuing you this warning letter and hereby giving you an opportunity to improve your conduct in the near future. Failing to do so will make you liable for disciplinary action.

For [Company Name],

I kindly request your valuable suggestions on the matter to make it more professional.

Thank you all in anticipation.

With warm regards,

Trupti

Dear Trupti,

First and foremost, I must appreciate you for writing on your own and asking for suggestions. In most cases, I have found that juniors are wary of writing and they want 100% spoon-feeding. You do not belong to this category. Very well!

Now, coming to the improvisation of your draft, it is as below:


Date:

To

Mr.

Employee No:


1. It has been observed that your manager, Mr. ______, instructed you to ______ (mention here what the employee was told to do) on _____ (date) at ______ hours (time). You had refused to oblige the instruction of your manager.

2. Your refusal to implement your manager's instruction is willful insubordination. Willful insubordination is "misconduct," and the same has been viewed seriously.

3. You are hereby warned to improve your conduct and cooperate with your manager. Disobedience to authority vitiates the work atmosphere. If an instance of this kind recurs, severe disciplinary action will be taken against you.

_______ (Name of the person issuing the letter)

_______ (Designation)

For ___________ (name of your company)


Note: Please note the following points in drafting:

a) Always assign numbers to the paragraphs.

b) This is a warning letter. Hence, you don't have to address that employee as "Dear _____". Just start with the main letter.

c) While issuing the warning, you should clearly write about the nature of the offense, i.e., what happened, where it happened, and when it happened.

d) Do you have approved standing orders? If yes, then you can quote the clause No, paragraph No, Section No of the "misconduct" mentioned in the standing orders. It will add weight to the warning letter and show that your action is consistent with the standing orders. Else, you can take help from the Standing Orders Act of your state.

e) Take a printout on your company letterhead. Issue the original to the employee and obtain his signature on the second copy. Tell him to write "read and understood" while accepting the warning letter.

All the best!

Dinesh V Divekar

Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.

Dear Dinesh Sir,

Thank you so much for reviewing my warning letter and giving me useful instructions which I will follow throughout my career.

With warm regards,
Trupti

Hello Trupti,

I am with Dinesh V Divekar in conveying kudos for the learning method you have adopted—unlike many of the postings we get to see in CiteHR. Do keep it up—frankly, it will take one a long way.

Coming to the letter you propose to issue to the employee—Warning Letter—I am not so sure if that's the right way.

By doing so, you are, in fact, PRE-JUDGING the whole issue—that the employee is wrong. What if he/she goes legal to say that he didn't make any mistake, but it was the superior who actually provoked him/her [which could be possible too]? Also, please note that nowadays going legal can also include going to the media—NOT that this WILL happen, but it would be wise for the employer to include this aspect in their calculations—for the worst-case scenario.

I think you would need to FIRST issue a Show-Cause Notice to the employee—where he/she gets a chance to give his/her version of the incident/situation IN WRITING. Based on the response/reply, you can then follow it up with the Warning Letter—IF warranted.

In a single line: Your primary focus has to be the Company's Interest—NOT any individual [including the MD]. While this may prove to be tough to follow always, the least you NEED to do is to give your views IN WRITING [just buy time to think & follow with an e-mail later, without giving any chance to be suspected of your intent]. Even then, if you are instructed to do something that COULD go against the Company's interests, you would be covering yourself.

Dinesh—What would you say?

Rgds,

TS

Dear Satish,

Issuing the show cause notice is correct, no doubt. What you are trying to say is that we should give a chance to the accused to defend his/her position. This way, we will understand both sides.

However, my views are as below.

There are two types of misconduct - major and minor. For every major misconduct, we need to conduct the domestic inquiry. Minor misconducts can be handled with a show cause notice.

Now, imagine there are some 200 employees in the company. There will be some misconduct every other day. Every time, should we issue a show cause notice, wait for the reply of the defaulter, and then issue him/her a warning letter? In that case, the organization will become quite bureaucratic. Secondly, it will erode the authority of the managers as well. The rigmarole will also slow down the decision-making process.

Now coming to Truti's case. If the misconduct is proved, then the G.M. can very well call the employee and his/her manager to his office. Listen to both sides carefully and give the verdict immediately. As a follow-up, a warning letter can be given. However, everything depends on the gravity of the case or misconduct. What is important here is not just listening to the manager but listening to the employee as well and then issuing the warning letter.

If the defaulter repeats the misconduct, then we can issue the show cause notice, ask for an explanation. If the explanation is not satisfactory, we can award him/her suitable punishment. However, if the misconduct is conducted for the first time, then I have found the defaulters are issued with warning letters directly.

My experience: During my HR days, I used to be busy in meetings. Taking benefit of my non-availability in the department, I found my HR Executive used to go out of the office for breakfast or something else. At times I was let down because of her absence in the HR Department. I had told her 2-3 times not to lock the department and go away when I was away for a meeting. The fourth time when she repeated the fault, I had issued her a warning letter. What would you do in such a case - issue a show cause notice or issue a warning letter directly?

This is what I feel. Other senior members can give their views as well.

Thanks,

Dinesh V Divekar

Hello Dinesh V Divekar,

The situation mentioned by Trupti with regard to your HR Executive is a bit different for 2 reasons:

1. In your case, you are a party to the situation, while in Trupti's case, she is a third party (the main contending parties being the concerned employee and the GM/Manager).

2. Even though you didn't issue a Show-cause Notice, you had already 'in spirit' issued it, more than once, by way of verbal warnings. Here I am going by the lack of inputs from Trupti (hence presuming that no Show cause notice was given, either in written or verbal form).

So, in your example with your HR Executive, what you did is right.

While I was referring to the Show-cause Notice, I was inferring to its both 'in-spirit' and 'written' forms, since Trupti is a third party and she needs to build up evidence that is acceptable to both the other parties and fulfill the company bylaws. Even if the concerned Manager has issued verbal notices/cautions, he/she still needs to prove that it was done ONCE THE CASE CROSSES the departmental boundary.

Frankly, the concerned GM should have sorted out the problem at his level, unless this is a Union situation (assuming it wasn't done at all or not done in true spirit, since Trupti didn't mention it clearly). I have seen quite a few situations like this one where the concerned Head of the department just didn't want to take a stand and transferred the responsibility of handling HR issues to the HR department—they have strange reasons/logic for this—'IT'S HR DEPT'S PROBLEM/ISSUE'—little realizing that it's HIS/HER Dept that is getting affected due to such situations (more often found in public sector companies, even though the private sector isn't immune too). Sometimes, politics/ego-clashes also play a part in the response mechanism of the Dept Head. I think this is what differentiates the 'in spirit' and formal issuance of the Show-cause Notice. For such people, the focus is more on the formality of issuing the Notice than the consequences of such an action—foremost being the time-lag for the solution to emerge.

The best-case scenario for such situations would be to refer to HR when all else failed at the local/department level—not as an action choice of first preference.

Well, at least this is my take on the subject.

Regards,

TS

@Dinesh Divekar,

Is it mandatory to add the nature of the offense (all details like where it happened and when it happened) in the warning letter if it is issued in response to the court of inquiry and the subject is well aware of the incident?

@Dinesh Divekar, is it mandatory to add the nature of the offense (all details like where it happened and when it happened) in the warning letter if it is issued in response to the court of inquiry, and the subject is well aware of the incident?

Attribution: https://www.citehr.com/411361-feedba...#ixzz2qX1m6bYz

Dear Saba,

If the warning letter is issued after conducting the court of inquiry, then there is no need to give the entire history of the case. All that is required to mention is:

"Reference is made to ______ (letter No) dated _____. Through this letter, you were told to depose before the Court of Inquiry (COI)." Then you can write, "Your misconduct has been proved under the provisions of ____ (mention clause number, paragraph number of some act, law, standing order etc). You are hereby warned...."

OR

"It has emerged in the COI that you did not commit any misconduct; hence, you have been exonerated."

By the way, are you from the defense? I ask this question because in a defense organization, a Court of Inquiry (COI) is conducted. Otherwise, the equivalent term in civil organizations is "Domestic Enquiry".

Ok...

Dinesh Divekar

Dear Saba,

In my haste, it appears that I have provided incorrect information, and I regret this error. During a court of inquiry, if misconduct by someone is established, the defaulter is charge-sheeted. If the alleged person is not found guilty, they are simply let off, and there is no need to issue a letter. Furthermore, my use of the word "exonerated" was quite inappropriate. Exoneration is a decision made by a judicial court, not within the authority of the presiding officer of the Court of Inquiry who does not have the power to punish anyone. Their role is solely to uncover facts and determine the blameworthiness of the individuals involved in the incident.

I hope this clarifies my previous post.

Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar

I would like to narrate the situation so that it would be easier to answer. Actually, a court of inquiry is conducted by the organization, and the subject is found guilty. It has been recommended by the Board of Inquiry that a warning letter will be issued to the subject. My question is: is it necessary to add the details of the accident in the warning letter like where it happened and when it happened.

What I composed is:

Subject: Warning

It has been observed that you were detailed as a driver of Vehicle No. ______________ for official duty on _________. Due to your negligence and careless driving, the vehicle met an accident. It has been recommended by the Board of Inquiry that it was your negligence which is a serious lapse. You are hereby warned to be careful in the future; otherwise, disciplinary action will be taken against you.

What are your suggestions?

Attribution http://citehr.com#ixzz2qdOVnPUD
Attribution http://citehr.com#ixzz2qdOVnPUD

Dinesh Sir,

Thank you for your valuable suggestion regarding letter writing and issuing.