The setting is an 82-bed hospital located in a small city. One day an employee of the maintenance department asked the supervisor, George Mann, for an hour or two off to take care of some personal business. Mann agreed and asked the employee to stop at the garden equipment dealership and buy several small lawn-mower parts that the department required. While transacting business at a local bank, the employee was seen by Sally Carter, the supervisor
of both human resources and payroll, who was in the bank on hospital business. Carter asked the employee what he was doing there and was told the visit was personal. Upon returning to the hospital, Sally Carter examined the employee's time card. The employee had not punched out to indicate when he had left the hospital. Carter noted the time the employee returned, and after the normal working day, she marked the card to indicate an absence of two hours on personal business. Carter advised the chief executive officer (CEO), Jane Arnold, of what she had done, citing a long-standing policy (some would say infrequently used, policy manual) requiring an employee to punch out when leaving the premises on personal business. The CEO agreed with Sally Carter's action. Carter advised Mann of the action and stated that the employee would not be paid for the two hours he was gone. Mann was angry. He said he had told the employee not to punch out because he had asked him to pick up some parts on his trip; however, Mann conceded that the employee's personal business was probably the greater part of the trip. Carter replied that Mann had no business doing what he had done and that it was his (Mann's) poor management that had caused the employee to suffer. Mann appealed to the CEO to reopen the matter based on his claim that there was an important side to the story that she had not yet heard. Jane Arnold agreed to hear both managers. State their position.
Instructions:
1. In either paragraph form or as a list of points, develop the argument you would be advancing if you were in Georges Mann's position.
2. In a similar fashion, thoroughly develop the argument you would advance if you were in Sally Carter's position.
3. Assuming the position of the CEO, Jane Arnold, render a decision.
Document your decision in whatever detail may be necessary, complete with an explanation of why you decided in this fashion.
4. Based on your responses to Questions 1-3, outline whatever steps-policy changes, guidelines, payroll requirements, or something else you believe should be considered to minimize the chances of similar conflict in the future.
The setting is an 82-bed hospital located in a small city. One day an employee of the maintenance department asked the supervisor, George Mann, for an hour or two off to take care of some personal business. Mann agreed and asked the employee to stop at the garden equipment dealership and buy several small lawn-mower parts that the department required. While transacting business at a local bank, the employee was seen by Sally Carter, the supervisor
of both human resources and payroll, who was in the bank on hospital business. Carter asked the employee what he was doing there and was told the visit was personal. Upon returning to the hospital, Sally Carter examined the employee's time card. The employee had not punched out to indicate when he had left the hospital. Carter noted the time the employee returned, and after the normal working day, she marked the card to indicate an absence of two hours on personal business. Carter advised the chief executive officer (CEO), Jane Arnold, of what she had done, citing a long-standing policy (some would say infrequently used, policy manual) requiring an employee to punch out when leaving the premises on personal business. The CEO agreed with Sally Carter's action. Carter advised Mann of the action and stated that the employee would not be paid for the two hours he was gone. Mann was angry. He said he had told the employee not to punch out because he had asked him to pick up some parts on his trip; however, Mann conceded that the employee's personal business was probably the greater part of the trip. Carter replied that Mann had no business doing what he had done and that it was his (Mann's) poor management that had caused the employee to suffer. Mann appealed to the CEO to reopen the matter based on his claim that there was an important side to the story that she had not yet heard. Jane Arnold agreed to hear both managers. State their position.
Instructions:
1. In either paragraph form or as a list of points, develop the argument you would be advancing if you were in Georges Mann's position.
2. In a similar fashion, thoroughly develop the argument you would advance if you were in Sally Carter's position.
3. Assuming the position of the CEO, Jane Arnold, render a decision.
Document your decision in whatever detail may be necessary, complete with an explanation of why you decided in this fashion.
4. Based on your responses to Questions 1-3, outline whatever steps-policy changes, guidelines, payroll requirements, or something else you believe should be considered to minimize the chances of similar conflict in the future.
