Reference no: EM131292343

Is an Employee Entitled to Have a Witness at a Disciplinary Interview? CASE STUDY 12-3 Terry Williams is an employee at a unionized plant in Memphis, Tennessee. Williams is a member of and represented by Local #10 of the United Brotherhood of America. Williams clocked out on Friday afternoon at 3:30 P.M., half an hour before his regular workday ended. Williams was later seen distributing union leaflets on the sidewalk near the main plant in Southhaven, Mississippi, eight miles south of Memphis, by plant manager Otto Payonzeck. Payonzeck confronted Williams and asked him what he was doing at the Southhaven, Mississippi, plant. Payonzeck then called the personnel office at the Memphis plant to see if Williams had permission to be at Southhaven. When Williams reported to work the next day, he was called to a meeting with supervisors Fisher and Gray and personnel administrator Harless. As soon as Williams entered the room, he recognized the people and asked to be permitted to call another employee into the room as a witness. Harless responded that it was not necessary because they were only going to ask him some questions and therefore he did not need a witness. Williams then asked to make a phone call, and this request was likewise rejected. The supervisors and Harless proceeded to ask Williams questions about what he did after he left work early on the previous workday. The meeting lasted 15 minutes, and Williams refused to answer any questions. In fact, Williams' response to most questions was that it was none of their business. Williams was permitted to leave the meeting and was told to return at 10:00 A.M. During the break, Williams called the NLRB's regional office. At 10:00 A.M., Williams returned to the meeting and was told that he was being suspended for three days. Supervisor Fisher said that on the morning of the day that Williams was suspended, he met with Harless to determine disciplinary action. Gray had suggested discharge; however, it was decided to suspend Williams for three days. Fisher said that Williams was refused a witness and the telephone call because they were not going to fire him, they were just going to suspend him. In fact, Williams refused to answer any questions about the rule infraction of leaving early to distribute union literature. Supervisor Gray's version of the incident varied slightly from Fisher's. Gray recalled that Harless told Williams, after denying his request to use the telephone, that he was being suspended for three days, but Harless would continue to investigate the matter.

Questions

1. Was Williams entitled to have a witness at the meeting with Harless, Gray, and Fisher? Explain.

2. To what remedy is an employee entitled if his or her rights have been violated?

3. What would be your ruling if the plant in Memphis had no union? Explain.

4. Should this suspension be upheld? Explain.