Ann Kotlarski quoted in HR Magazine
"Management Tools: Avoid pre-emptive strikes: when confronted with complaints from an employee and his manager about each other, be upfront and honest"

The May issue of HR Magazine includes the article "Management Tools: Avoid pre-emptive strikes: when confronted with complaints from an employee and his manager about each other, be upfront and honest" notes when a supervisor and employee are at odds and forward complaints.... it's not uncommon for subordinates to "strike first" when they sense they're about to get in trouble. How you, as a manager, field those complaints can have serious ramifications for your company. The last thing you want to do is create a record that an employee came to you in good faith, only to be given a written warning a few days later for what could be considered a "pretextual" reason. "That record could smack of retaliation even to the untrained eye, so you could only imagine how a plaintiff's attorney might see it," says Ann Kotlarski, senior litigation partner at Seyfarth Shaw LLP in Century City, Calif. "And you'd be surprised how preemptive employees with long memories can be," adds Kotlarski. "Sometimes the complaint will go back more than a year as employees try desperately to insulate themselves from any harm by striking first and hoping the company will then grant them some kind of immunity from discipline or other consequences." . . . "Employees are sophisticated workplace consumers, and it's often the case that they know their rights as well as the strategies to protect their employment," says Kotlarski. "In essence, you have to remove the arrow from their quiver so they can't shoot it back at you. That's why it's so important to communicate events fairly and honestly, no matter who initiates the complaint.". . . "Your best bet will always be to tell the truth as the middleman and impartial observer. And you have to create a record that you focused on the [observation] rather than the [judgment] both in your questioning techniques and documented notes. This way, you will buy your company the time and opportunity to look into the background details of both complaints at a later date." . . . Remember your two obligations to the company when faced with investigating and evaluating any complaints that are brought to your attention: First, you are responsible for conducting a timely and thorough investigation. Second, you are responsible for reaching a reasonable conclusion. That may not sound like much, but it speaks volumes in its simplicity. In fact, many employment litigation cases are the result of a plaintiff's attorney's perception that a supervising manager, human resource executive or other internal official violated one of these two basic rules. "You're not expected to be a lawyer, fortuneteller or private investigator in these matters," says Kotlarski. "But you will be held to a 'reasonable person' standard, and you will want to make sure that, as an official of your company, you created an open and honest record, you have heard both sides of the story, and you have conducted a reasonably diligent investigation before reaching a conclusion."