Plant management complains to the head of the corporate IT department that the local head of IT is unresponsive, apathetic, rigid, territorial, and “disconnected” with the operational needs of the business. The head of corporate IT reveals the results of the ensuing investigation in the written warning drafted below.
PERFORMANCE CORRECTION NOTICEDisciplinary Level□ Verbal Correction—(To memorialize the conversation.)⊠ Written Warning—(State nature of offense, method of correction, and action to
Employee Name:David Livingston Department:Information Technology Date Presented:December 6, 2010 Supervisor:Sarah Mitchell
be taken if offense is repeated.)□ Investigatory Leave—(Include length of time and nature of review.)□ Final Written Warning
□. Without decision-making leave □. With decision-making leave (Attach memo of instructions.) □. With unpaid suspension Subject:Lack of managerial leadership and lack of trust
□ Policy/Procedure Violation
⊠ Performance Transgression
⊠ Behavior/Conduct Infraction
□ Absenteeism/Tardiness
Prior Notifications
Level of Discipline Date Subject Verbal ___________ __________________________________________ Written ___________ __________________________________________ Final Written ___________ __________________________________________
-192-
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information:
Book title: 101 Sample Write-Ups for Documenting Employee Performance Problems: A Guide to Progressive Discipline & Termination.
Edition: 2nd.
Contributors: Paul Falcone - Author.
Publisher: American Management Association.
Place of publication: New York.
Publication year: 2010.
Page number: 192.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.
One moment ...
- Georgia
- Arial
- Times New Roman
- Verdana
- Courier/monospaced
Reset