Preventive management of potential conflict between employees and employers during illness or disability period
Hi, everyone! I would like to share with you a typical situation that I have being the chance to address as a Colombian lawyer.
Imagine a worker, who has a long time history of continuous work disabilities (typically, more than 180 days continuous) because of an accident or a disease (no matter its origin, the current work conditions, or a different origin).
The situation arises when the worker, who cannot return to work due to recurrent medical absents, starts to feel abandoned by his employer. The interaction between the injured or sick employee with the employer gradually tends to be minimal or non-existent. At first, there is some informal interaction with their superiors and colleagues (how do you feel? How are things going?), and eventually with the human resources personnel (mainly for the purposes of the processing of sick leaves with the Social Security System).
However, times goes by, and the sick employee is not recovering as it must be the wish of everyone involved (the employer, the Social Security System, and of course, the worker itself and his family nucleus). The conflict gradually grows because the employee starts to feel isolated, and eventually, abandoned by their superiors.
This is a crucial conjuncture, because at these times, the worker needs, not only the economic compensation that the Social Security provides (as a substitute of the salary during illness period), but mainly, emotional support from his peers
Moreover, the worker will require psychological and legal support, considering the procedures needed for granting a disability pension, compensation, in the case that the employee does not get full recovery from his illness.
When the employee fails in providing that kind of support (that, actually, is convenient for him, simply in order for allowing him to fire the worker with just cause: the granting of the disability pension or the impossibility of getting his full recovery in more than 180 days, as Colombian legislation foresees), a conflict is potentially born.
Remember that in many legislations (Colombia included), the fire-at-will power of the employer has severely restricted in cases when the worker is ill or in a condition of eventual disability. There is even a worker's right to get reinstalled to work, with salaries pendant and full previous benefits. So, eventually if of the mutual interest of both parties (the employer and the employee) to solve the worker status in a definitive and concerted way.
How to manage proactively with the situation?
First, we need to understand that employers and workers must perform his duties and rights of the work contract, under the principles of fairness and good faith. In general, employers have obligations of protection and security, while employees have obligations of guarding obedience and loyalty to their employers.
In the proposed situation, the main duty and desired goal of both parts are to fulfill their best efforts to get the worker reinstalled to work with full recovery. If not, provisions about how to guarantee and adequate re-installment (as a disabled worker), of the consensual outcome of resignation by the mutual decision must be considered, in order to prevent the escalation of the conflict into one of bigger proportions.
McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y can be useful for the aim to anticipate subjacent conflicts between the employer and the sick employee. Theory X tend to take a pessimistic view of their people, and assume that they are naturally unmotivated, dislike work, avoid responsibility and need constant direction, need supervision at every step, and have no incentive to work or ambition (Morse & Lorsh, 1970; Chapman, 2020).
When the employer thinks like Theory X, surely he will tend to perceive the continuous sick leaves of the employee as a burden, even taking regrettable measures, like simply firing him.
On the contrary, Theory Y has an optimistic, positive opinion of their people, assuming that workers are happy to work on their own initiative, more involved in decision making, self-motivated to complete their tasks, enjoy taking ownership of their work, seek and accept responsibility, and need a little direction, view work as fulfilling and challenging, and solve problems creatively and imaginatively (Morse & Lorsh, 1970; Chapman, 2020).
Following Theory Y postulates, a sick worker (stuck in a very vulnerable position), will tend to be anxious, vulnerable, and eventually, depressed. Therefore, a wise employer must take systematic and coherent measures to assure quick and full recovery (physical, emotional, and psychological), including the arrangements of alternatives in the working conditions (teleworking) until things get back to normal.
In my opinion, there are three actionable recommendations for how the people in the situation could act:
As I said, a wise employer must take a systematic approach, for managing in a proactive and preventive way the situation. There are three basic suggestions:
1) Never lose contact with the sick employee, through this difficult situation. For a worker, it is important to retain contact with their superiors and peers, because the situation is all over his/her control.
2) Provide the employee on continuous sick leave, a sound combination of psychological and legal counseling, in order to assure quick and full recovery (physical, emotional, and psychological), including the arrangements of alternatives in the working conditions (teleworking, workplace or workday redesign, etc.). If not possible, this effective support will be very useful for assuring the worker's retirement, after granting a disability pension or compensation, or the voluntary resignation of the employee, with no risk of legal consequences.
3) Above all, be just and fair. The employer has to remember that labor relations and labor law have a protective function and character. And also that, no matter it is an omnipresent reality that labor relations (capital vs. work) always get around the economy, you must never forget the most indisputable fact: we are talking about people.
References:
(n.d.) Reading: McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y. In Lumenlearrning.com. Retrieved on November 21, 2020, from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wmintrobusiness/chapter/reading-douglas-mcgregors-theory-x-and-theory-y-2/
Chapman, A. (2020, September 3) What is X-Y Theory of Management? En Businessballs. Retrieved on November 21, 2020, from https://www.businessballs.com/improving-workplace-performance/mcgregors-xy-theory-of-management/
Morse, J. & Lorsh, J. (1970, May) Beyond Theory Y. In Harvard Business Review. Retrieved on November 21, 2020, from https://hbr.org/1970/05/beyond-theory-y
Imagine a worker, who has a long time history of continuous work disabilities (typically, more than 180 days continuous) because of an accident or a disease (no matter its origin, the current work conditions, or a different origin).
The situation arises when the worker, who cannot return to work due to recurrent medical absents, starts to feel abandoned by his employer. The interaction between the injured or sick employee with the employer gradually tends to be minimal or non-existent. At first, there is some informal interaction with their superiors and colleagues (how do you feel? How are things going?), and eventually with the human resources personnel (mainly for the purposes of the processing of sick leaves with the Social Security System).
However, times goes by, and the sick employee is not recovering as it must be the wish of everyone involved (the employer, the Social Security System, and of course, the worker itself and his family nucleus). The conflict gradually grows because the employee starts to feel isolated, and eventually, abandoned by their superiors.
This is a crucial conjuncture, because at these times, the worker needs, not only the economic compensation that the Social Security provides (as a substitute of the salary during illness period), but mainly, emotional support from his peers
Moreover, the worker will require psychological and legal support, considering the procedures needed for granting a disability pension, compensation, in the case that the employee does not get full recovery from his illness.
When the employee fails in providing that kind of support (that, actually, is convenient for him, simply in order for allowing him to fire the worker with just cause: the granting of the disability pension or the impossibility of getting his full recovery in more than 180 days, as Colombian legislation foresees), a conflict is potentially born.
Remember that in many legislations (Colombia included), the fire-at-will power of the employer has severely restricted in cases when the worker is ill or in a condition of eventual disability. There is even a worker's right to get reinstalled to work, with salaries pendant and full previous benefits. So, eventually if of the mutual interest of both parties (the employer and the employee) to solve the worker status in a definitive and concerted way.
How to manage proactively with the situation?
First, we need to understand that employers and workers must perform his duties and rights of the work contract, under the principles of fairness and good faith. In general, employers have obligations of protection and security, while employees have obligations of guarding obedience and loyalty to their employers.
In the proposed situation, the main duty and desired goal of both parts are to fulfill their best efforts to get the worker reinstalled to work with full recovery. If not, provisions about how to guarantee and adequate re-installment (as a disabled worker), of the consensual outcome of resignation by the mutual decision must be considered, in order to prevent the escalation of the conflict into one of bigger proportions.
McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y can be useful for the aim to anticipate subjacent conflicts between the employer and the sick employee. Theory X tend to take a pessimistic view of their people, and assume that they are naturally unmotivated, dislike work, avoid responsibility and need constant direction, need supervision at every step, and have no incentive to work or ambition (Morse & Lorsh, 1970; Chapman, 2020).
When the employer thinks like Theory X, surely he will tend to perceive the continuous sick leaves of the employee as a burden, even taking regrettable measures, like simply firing him.
On the contrary, Theory Y has an optimistic, positive opinion of their people, assuming that workers are happy to work on their own initiative, more involved in decision making, self-motivated to complete their tasks, enjoy taking ownership of their work, seek and accept responsibility, and need a little direction, view work as fulfilling and challenging, and solve problems creatively and imaginatively (Morse & Lorsh, 1970; Chapman, 2020).
Following Theory Y postulates, a sick worker (stuck in a very vulnerable position), will tend to be anxious, vulnerable, and eventually, depressed. Therefore, a wise employer must take systematic and coherent measures to assure quick and full recovery (physical, emotional, and psychological), including the arrangements of alternatives in the working conditions (teleworking) until things get back to normal.
In my opinion, there are three actionable recommendations for how the people in the situation could act:
As I said, a wise employer must take a systematic approach, for managing in a proactive and preventive way the situation. There are three basic suggestions:
1) Never lose contact with the sick employee, through this difficult situation. For a worker, it is important to retain contact with their superiors and peers, because the situation is all over his/her control.
2) Provide the employee on continuous sick leave, a sound combination of psychological and legal counseling, in order to assure quick and full recovery (physical, emotional, and psychological), including the arrangements of alternatives in the working conditions (teleworking, workplace or workday redesign, etc.). If not possible, this effective support will be very useful for assuring the worker's retirement, after granting a disability pension or compensation, or the voluntary resignation of the employee, with no risk of legal consequences.
3) Above all, be just and fair. The employer has to remember that labor relations and labor law have a protective function and character. And also that, no matter it is an omnipresent reality that labor relations (capital vs. work) always get around the economy, you must never forget the most indisputable fact: we are talking about people.
References:
(n.d.) Reading: McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y. In Lumenlearrning.com. Retrieved on November 21, 2020, from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wmintrobusiness/chapter/reading-douglas-mcgregors-theory-x-and-theory-y-2/
Chapman, A. (2020, September 3) What is X-Y Theory of Management? En Businessballs. Retrieved on November 21, 2020, from https://www.businessballs.com/improving-workplace-performance/mcgregors-xy-theory-of-management/
Morse, J. & Lorsh, J. (1970, May) Beyond Theory Y. In Harvard Business Review. Retrieved on November 21, 2020, from https://hbr.org/1970/05/beyond-theory-y
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario