ETHICAL TEAMWORKJudgment DazeApproximately 45 minutes |
43 |
Overview
Teams discuss their reasons for selecting possible courses of action related to actual work-related cases. The team(s) that most often rules the way the judge ruled is awarded a token prize.
Purpose
To apprise participants of legal outcomes that may prevent them from engaging in unethical behavior.
Group Size
A group of any size will work, as long as teams can be formed with the same number of participants in each.
Room Arrangement
Arrange seating that will accommodate teams working around a table.
Materials
Handouts 43.1 through 43.5, “Court Shorts,” for each participant
Optional: Token prizes for the winning team, such as miniature gavels or simply pieces of fruit or books about teamwork
Procedure
1.Discuss the fact that laws are broken sometimes by people who are absolutely unaware that the laws they are breaking even exist. In fact, team members may be unaware of some laws that could directly affect teams in the workplace.
2.Present an overview of the assignment: Teams will discuss workplace situations involving teams and team members and will come to decisions regarding the “right” course of action. The team that has the most right answers will emerge victorious and will be so recognized (if only through applause).
3.Divide the group into teams with an equal number of participants in each.
4.Distribute the first handout and allow the teams 5 minutes to complete it.
5.Continue with each of the remaining handouts.
6.Share the answers:
1 = False. If such remarks are made in the presence of employees likely to take offense at such statements, Ken may be guilty of unlawful harassment.
2 = True. But an employee who claimed he had taped conversations without telling people just to refresh his memory had to pay co-workers and his company $132,000.
3 = True (assuming this was not a singular example). In the actual case, a New York City bank had to pay the employee $2,600,000.
4 = True. The law firm in the actual case had to pay a $6,900,000 fine and the attorney himself (who was also guilty of touching the employee and making lewd remarks) was fined $225,000.
5 = False. The court found “the First Amendment is not a license for interference with the proper functioning of the workplace.” The court also denied the discrimination claim as the company was able to prove its policies applied to everyone.
7.Award recognition and possibly token prizes to the winning team(s).
Variation
Invite someone from the legal department of the participants’ organization (or another organization) to discuss labor and employment laws.
Discussion
What is the worst legal mistake you can make at work?
How much training has been provided regarding legislation pertaining to family leave, for example, or harassment? How could teams learn more about laws that may affect them?
How much responsibility does or should your organization assume in making employees aware of labor and employment laws?
Quotation
“Leadership is a potent combination of strategy and character. But if you must be without one, be without the strategy.”
—General H. Norman Schwarzkopf
Points of Interest
When infractions have occurred, it’s the team leader’s or supervisor’s responsibility to provide coaching feedback to the person who may have committed the infraction. The following questions will help during coaching sessions:
1.Is there a real infraction or simply hearsay evidence of such?
2.Have standards been made clear to the individual before the incident?
3.Can you assume the correct behavior would be “obvious” to any reasonable person?
4.Has such behavior been tolerated in the past?
5.Has tolerance of the behavior been accepted in the past depending on the individual, the group, the task, and the situation?
6.Will you be able to maintain your objectivity in this investigation?
7.What resources do you need to call on?
8.Should there be a suspension period for the employee while the investigation is ongoing?
9.Have you given the employee an opportunity to present his or her version of the event?
10.What disciplinary precedents are there?
11.What does the employee’s previous record tell you?
12.Could the contemplated action be considered discriminatory?
13.What documentation is required? How much time is needed to resolve this issue?
14.What possible repercussions could be harmful to others? To the organization itself?
HANDOUT 43.1
Court Shorts
SITUATION
James, Ken, Cynthia, Robert, and Phyllis serve on a cross-functional team, the purpose of which is to survey employees to learn why retention rates are lower than the industry norm. They’ve finally finished compiling the survey results and have decided to celebrate by having dinner together. Just as they’re about to leave work for the restaurant, Cynthia receives a call advising that her teen-age son has broken his ankle in football practice. She gives her regrets at not being able to celebrate with her team and heads home.
During the dinner, Cynthia’s name comes up and the team leader, Ken, moves from a discussion of how pleasant Cynthia is to how sexy she is. Because he is out of the office, it’s after working hours, and Cynthia is not present, it is perfectly acceptable for him to express his opinion.
True or False?
HANDOUT 43.2
Court Shorts
SITUATION
Sam was the first to acknowledge the team meetings were not going as smoothly as he had hoped. The problem was, when he sat down to analyze what went wrong, he had forgotten most of what was said. At the next team meeting, he advises his team that he’s planning to tape record the meeting in an attempt to understand the problem better. Because he obtained their consent beforehand, it is perfectly legal to tape record the proceedings.
True or False?
HANDOUT 43.3
Court Shorts
SITUATION
Roberto often brings Italian pastries to team meetings—his brother owns a pastry shop. As the team gathers around the coffee and cannolis, they often make remarks such as, “This is an offer I can’t refuse.” Although he makes an important contribution to the work of the team, he has not impressed his boss as much as he has impressed his teammates. His boss fires him, with accusations that he created a “Mafia shop.” The boss also explained during the termination meeting that he needed “a true American” who could deal with external customers.
Roberto sues on the basis of discrimination against national origin and will likely win.
True or False?
HANDOUT 43.4
Court Shorts
SITUATION
Although Quentin’s team is known for getting the job done, they’re also known for having a good time as they do so. They often horse around with one another before the meeting starts. Joe, who provides legal counsel for the project they’re implementing, is one of the most mischievous team members. He playfully dropped candy one morning in the blouse pocket of Harriette, a new addition to the team. He tapped her on the arm and told her not to worry, he wasn’t planning to take the candy back. Harriette has sufficient grounds for a lawsuit.
True or False?
HANDOUT 43.5
Court Shorts
SITUATION
Elijah is a born-again Christian who holds Bible study meetings with his team before they start their regular meetings. He had his secretary type notes from both the Bible study meetings and the regular meetings. The secretary, not part of the team, complained and Elijah was asked to stop using company resources for religious activities. He complied and even went so far as to remove all religious materials from his office.
Not long afterward, Elijah was fired for poor performance. He sued on the basis of race and religion and a violation of his Constitutional right to free speech. He will probably win the case.
True or False?