Introduction

When one thinks of termination of employment, the mind usually flies to an image of a poor dejected employee walking away from his place of work with his head down, tears falling down his cheeks with few dreams in his head. This may be an exaggerated picture for some of us, but termination usually brings with it a sense of shock and desolation, if it is unexpected.

It is also relevant to point out that termination is also not an easy decision for management, if management upholds certain ethics and treats its workforce as a truly treasured resource.

So is there any way in which termination of employment can be made an acceptable course of action to both sides?

Yes, there is, and the most straightforward way of putting it is to remove the element of the unexpected from the whole scenario. In simple terms, when termination is a thought-out course of action with reasonable decisions that have been clearly communicated, it can be acceptable to the receiving party. Acceptable is not joyful, but working adults go through both joyous and serious experiences in their working relationships and none will end in tears as long as their human dignity is respected.

Types of Termination

There are essentially three types of termination of employment:

• Termination for performance-related issues

• Termination for health-related issues

• Redundancy

Although all three types of termination are initiated by management, the reason for each is different. So, one may ask, should a different method be used? The first two relate to the behaviour of the employee, while redundancy relates to market forces, or management ineptitude. The law lays down different rules for redundancy and for the first two types but, in best practice, there are general principles and policies that can apply to all types.

Company policies

There is one general principle that applies to all types of management decisions: make your course of action known before the event happens. This means that an organisation can describe its actions on termination of any type in a company policy handbook circulated to all employees. More importantly, the policies should be clearly explained to new employees at the time of induction. If an employee knows beforehand that, should his performance fall below the required standard, there is a known procedure that will be followed, he/she will feel less shocked once that procedure is activated. This also applies to health issues.

A good policy is accompanied by effective communication channels. Employees working below par should be told, both informally and formally, that their performance is not up to the standard required. This should be done tactfully but clearly, and advice on how to improve should also be given. The employee should be offered an opportunity to say why she/he thinks her/his performance may be below par and, in such cases, the required support and training can be extended over time. However, if the performance does not improve, the system of written warnings also takes the unexpected shock out of the complete procedure.

In cases of redundancy, a company does not usually find itself in deep waters all of a sudden, unless it loses a very important client or market base. However, if the company follows a system of periodic information and consultation with its employees, the employees themselves will know that something is amiss, before the company actually tells them. Again, good communication channels and a known procedure for redundancy can take the unexpected shock out of the event.

Termination without tears

If actual termination is imminent, in the case of redundancy the law is clear and should be followed to the letter. If unions are involved, the company is bound to keep them informed of what is going on and to involve them in the process. In Malta, in past cases of redundancy on a large scale (even 10 redundancies can be a large scale for Malta, let alone 50 or more) the Employment and Training Corporation can be asked to step in to help with the registration and possible placement of the potential unemployed. These people can be given a one-to-one service, sometimes on company premises, and profiled for future jobs immediately. This will alleviate some of the fear of change and give immediate hope to those without a job.

In the case of performance-related termination, the company, after having gone through the written warnings and full communication procedure, can enter into a negotiated termination with the employee in question, which may involve a longer notice period and possible help in finding new employment. The company can also support the employee by extending or paying for psychological help.

In the case of health-related termination, the company is morally required to exhaust all possible avenues before actually terminating the employment of the employee in question. However, even when the organisation feels that there is no alternative, management can still extend help in terms of psychological support so that the sick employee does not feel stranded.

Conclusion

Termination is always a difficult area, no matter how it is handled. However, it does not necessarily have to be a degrading experience. Handled with tact, honesty and support, it can still be done with dignity. It should be remembered that how management treats the person who goes will reflect on how those who remain will treat management.

Termination without Tears is one of the workshops offered at the 2012 National Annual HR Conference which is being held on 5 October at the San Gorg Corinthia Hotel in St Julian’s. More information is available from James Gatt on 2137 0685 or [email protected]

Dr Roselyn Borg is managing

director of Twenty-One Law