Being Offended Does Not Mean You Are Right
We have all been to those big box stores where food samples are given away for free to entice people to buy the product. The people working at those food stations do not actually work for the store, but rather for a company that runs the sample stations. Jane was a sales advisor giving out samples.
Her employer’s obligation to the store included making sure that advisors met cleanliness standards. Those included sanitizing work stations, testing temperatures of food samples and providing specific size requirements.
Jane had complaints about how a new manager was dealing with staff. She felt like she was always getting assigned to the more complicated food-sampling stations. Previous managers would sometimes work at the stations themselves but the new one did not, instead spending his time in the office. She put these complaints in writing and got a written response.
Her boss noted that all advisors were assigned complex sampling stations. He reminded her that as a courtesy he had just assigned two supervisors to assist her with her setup the previous day. He reviewed his roles and duties and explained how that required him to spend time in the office.
It was noted that Jane had been late on more than one occasion and that it was her responsibility to manage and organize her work station. Jane was invited to reach out again if she had further questions.
Not knowing when to leave well enough alone, Jane responded, indicating that getting supervisor help was not a “courtesy” and suggested she might contact head office about her issues. Her manager provided her with contact information for the appropriate person to email. He also sent an email to her and head office outlining a number of performance issues involving Jane.
When Jane wrote to head office she indicated that she had been late because the manager had sent her to the wrong location, and on another day she was upset as she had been assigned a complicated food-sampling station. She explained that her temperature log book was not complete because a co-worker who had covered for her had not completed the log book. She noted that she had to leave her sampling station when she was provided with the wrong pricing list.
All her issues, she said, were caused by her manager. She said she couldn’t handle the situation anymore and reiterated that the food-sampling stations should be distributed more evenly.
Head office investigated all of Jane’s complaints and found them unwarranted, including noting that she had not been given more complicated sampling stations than anyone else. A few days after that, Jane was assigned a station where she was preparing grilled cheese sandwiches. The food wholesaler had provided specifications about how much cheese to put on the sandwich. Jane was being stingy with the cheese and her manager told her to increase the amount. She told him that she could do what she wanted and did not need to follow his instructions. He had no authority to tell her what to do. She was sent home early for insubordination.
Within a week, Jane received a warning letter for leaving her station unattended, not performing temperature checks before serving food, yelling at her manager when she was assigned a complicated sampling station and refusing to remove her watch. For the next three days Jane simply did not show up for work. The manager left repeated voice mails and sent emails but received no response. The employer said Jane had abandoned her employment and terminated the relationship.
Jane filed a complaint claiming that she had suffered reprisal for having raised health and safety concerns. Jane’s problem, however, was that while she obviously did not like her manager, none of this had anything to do with health and safety.
Her complaint was doomed from the beginning, but the wheels of justice started to roll and a full hearing was held. During the hearing Jane tried to claim that she had effectively filed a bullying and harassment complaint without using those words. The adjudicator, however, found that all she was really complaining about was how her performance was being managed. Although she cost taxpayers a fair amount of money, Jane ended up with nothing.
This article was originally published by The Hamilton Spectator.
