HUMAN RESOURCES 5
Theachievement of high performance and positive attitude among theemployees is dependent on the human resource practices adopted by anorganization. White and Bryson (2013) assert that elaborate andpervasive HRM systems result in integrative experience and positiveattitude in a team. A well function human resources team serves as agreat advantage to an organization. First, it plays the role ofcommunication when employees with various issues approach it. A wellperforming human resource system pays full attention to the employeesand provides solutions. Besides, a well performing human resourcesystem is keen to innovate new ways of handling complaints as well asimproving employees working conditions.
Achievingpositive performance at the individual and institutional level willrequire appropriate HR practices. The human resource team shouldunderstand their importance in hiring and training the workforce,taking care of the performance management system, building thecultures and values of the organization and in managing conflictswithin the organization. Another important consideration towardsenhancing individual performance is respect for the values, culture,and behavior of a workplace, the human resource department is solelyresponsible for developing and managing good relations in theorganization (White & Bryson, 2013).
Inthe case study, we consider an instance where an operator in a localchemical company is facing charges after shooting another personwhile under the influence of alcohol. Upon his release on bail, hetakes a vacation to cover for the time missed while in jail. The moveis against the requirements for him to report to work on thefollowing day. Although he is a long-term employee of theorganization, the operator has several previous issues that affecthis performance and relationship with his supervisors. He has alreadybeen rehabilitated after agreeing to have problems with alcoholabuse. His actions resulted in a demotion from a supervisoryposition. It is recognized that he works in a hazardous location anddepartment that can affect the production process. Other operators inthe company have already expressed their dissatisfaction whileworking with him (White & Bryson, 2013).
Indeciding the fate of the employee, the plant manager needs toconsider the consequences of the options available in retaining orfiring the employee. The first option is to allow the operator toreturn to work since he has not done anything wrong at the workplace.Nevertheless, the choice is also pegged on the fact that the accusedhas not been found guilty. The move may allow the individual toreform and reconsider his previous behaviors. Unfortunately, theaction jeopardizes the worker’s productivity, as he will beattending court sessions. As such, the operations of the company willbe affected by his absence. Further, we note that the business islikely to tarnish its reputation and incur costs in hiring casualemployees to stand in for the accused before the court seals his fate(White & Bryson, 2013).
Thesecond option is to suspend the operator, but pay him until such atime when the court makes a verdict. The move is likely to benefitthe employee, as it will give him time to attend the court sessionswithout worrying about reporting to work. Further, his welfare isconsidered, as he will continue receiving a salary from the company.However, the decision is expensive to the company since it willincrease the operational costs. It is noteworthy that the trial islikely to take more than six months (White & Bryson, 2013).
Thethird option is to suspend the employee without pay. Under thisalternative, the employee will be allowed to return to work if he isfound innocent. The move draws several considerations anduncertainties. We are not aware of the likely court judgment or theperiod it will take before the final decision is made. Suchuncertainty has adverse effects on the human resource planningprocess at the company. Nonetheless, it seals the company againstexpensive decisions. On his part, the employee will be negativelyaffected, as he will not have any source of income. It is theresponsibility of companies to mind about the interests of theiremployees (White & Bryson, 2013).
Thelast option is to terminate the employment immediately. The move isbeneficial to the company on many fronts. It is essential to notethat other employees are skeptical about working with the operatordue to his behaviors. Terminating the contract will also help thefirm in getting the person for the job therefore, eliminate somepotential problems. The productivity of the worker remains inquestion due to the alcohol problems. Already, the chemical firm hastried its best to rehabilitate the employee with no positive results.It is unlikely that the staff member will change his behavior hence,making contract termination the best decision to implement (White &Bryson, 2013).
Asa plant manager, I would recommend the termination of the employee’sservices in the company. The operator is grappling with manyproblems, including, alcohol abuse and murder case that are likely tojeopardize his productivity. Further, his actions and behavior at theworkplace have negative effects on the productivity of otheremployees. His relationship with the colleagues has deteriorated asthey see him as a potential danger in the production process. Thefirm needs to mind about the interests of the productive employeeswho are committed towards positive outcomes (White & Bryson,2013).
Itis also appropriate to consider the quality of the products by havingthe right employees undertaking the business functions. An employeewho continues to engage in unwarranted behaviors that jeopardizeorganizational performance should not hold the company to ransom. Hiscontinued stay will affect teamwork and self-esteem among theemployees who work in the same department. Nonetheless, I wouldadvise the management to consider awarding a pension to the employeeas he has worked in the company for a long time (White & Bryson, 2013).
White,M., & Bryson, A. (2013). Positive employee attitudes: How muchhuman resource management do you need? HumanRelations,66(3), 385-406.