Skip to main content

Employee Refuses To Sign Disciplinary Notice/Performance Improvement Plan...Now What?


A few weeks ago, a co-worker approached me with a question about what to do about another employee that refused to sign a performance improvement plan.  As a bit of background, this co-worker oversees a team of several other employees and noticed that one particular member of this team had a performance record that was lacking.  A performance improvement plan was drafted and the employee was asked to sign it.  However, the employee apparently refused to do so and my co-worker was left wondering...what now?

While this resource is not the definitive guide to the topic and not intended to serve as legal advice (those experiencing a similar situation should consult their HR representative and/or employment law attorney for guidance), it provides a framework that can be referred to when needed.


Disciplinary Notice/Performance Improvement Plan Issued

Let us start at the beginning.  The employer or supervisor issues an employee a disciplinary notice, performance improvement plan, or related document in regard to that employee's violation of company policy, poor work performance, etc.  While some employers issue these notices or plans verbally in a meeting, I would suggest putting something in writing to properly document things.  (Remember, if an employer is being proactive, it is important to create a written record of an employee's job performance in the event litigation arises at a later date).

Employers should then ask the employee to sign the document acknowledging they received it.  Many HR experts suggest putting a signature box at the end of the document, with a clear separation between the disciplinary notice/performance improvement plan and where the employee would actually sign.  Other HR advisers also advise that employers provide an area (again, separate from the disciplinary notice/performance improvement plan and signature area) for the employee to write a rebuttal.  A rebuttal can serve several purposes:  1) it can indirectly prove that the employee knew of the discipline/performance plan and 2) the rebuttal can make an employer aware of potential issues the employer would need to investigate (such as harassment claims).


The Employee Refuses To Sign

Now we are getting to the meat of this whole post.  Some employees may refuse to sign the document for a handful of reasons.  The employer then has several options:

  • The employer could disregard the entire matter, not require the employee sign the document, and sweep the matter under the rug.  However, this practice lessens any impact a disciplinary notice/performance improvement plan actually has.  If employees know they can refuse to sign and the employer will disregard the matter, what is the point of going through with actually writing a disciplinary notice/performance improvement plan??
  • Another option is to actually approach the employee and ask them directly why they will not sign.  Perhaps the employee forgot, misplaced the document, or did not realize the employer required their signature.  Open lines of communication are always key.
  • In addition, the employer could have another employee (such as a manager) serve as a witness.  With the witness present, the employer could have the employee acknowledge that the employer reviewed the disciplinary notice/performance plan but the employee refused to sign.  The employer and witness could then sign a document that indicates the date the matter was discussed with the employee and the employee's refusal to sign the document.  (Have you picked up on how important written documentation of these sort of matters are?)
  • One other option is to terminate an employee that refuses to sign the document.  However, many in the HR field have cautioned this can backfire, unnecessarily escalate the matter, and expose the employer to increased unemployment taxes (if the employee filed for unemployment compensation).  While some employers might like this hard nosed tactic of terminating employees in these situations, I would advise treading lightly.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more