education15.htm

PLEASE BE PATIENT, THIS PAGE MAY TAKE A WHILE TO LOAD

WEB PAGE INDEX
Includes recent updates

Lying to Cover Up Dishonesty

When workers do something dishonest or make an error that violates an employer rule, they may try to lie their way out of it. While that may be an understandable (although hardly admirable) response, a study of arbitrators' decisions makes it clear the tactic is not a good one: getting caught lying is likely to result in a harsher penalty than would have been imposed for the original act. Because human beings try to cover their tracks by lying, it's the rare steward who won't be faced with representing a co-worker who get into trouble this way. So, for a taste of what you can expect, you might want to take a look at arbitration outcomes in a variety of such cases.

Funeral Leave

An employee requested personal leave on short notice to attend a funeral, but engaged in moonlighting by driving a tour bus instead. He lied when asked where he had been, and was fired. The arbitrator upheld the discharge, saying that even though personal days may be a private matter, the employees knew that once a schedule was posted, changes were a problem for the company, and the employee lied about where he had been.

Borrowing Money

A nursing home workers was fired for violating a rule that forbid staff members from borrowing money from patients. The arbitrator reduced the penalty to a three-month suspension. Even though she knew about the rule, the arbitrator said, the worker had no intent to defraud the patient, and it was not an act of dishonesty sufficient to justify discharge.

Diligent Security Guard

A security guard was demoted for keeping an audit group waiting for 15 minutes, being out of uniform, deliberately lying, and trying to enlist a co-worker in a cover-up as to the reason for delay. The arbitrator reversed the demotion and instead ordered an eight-day suspension, saying that the guard's radio had alerted him to unusual activity on the company's grounds. The arbitrator said, however, that it was not reasonable for the company to require the guard to be fully dressed in his uniform when on duty.

Bus Ride

A transit company employee was fired after he took a bus for a joy ride and lied to the company president about his actions. The arbitrator put him back to work, declaring that the discharge was in violation of the concept of progressive discipline, and no criminal charges were brought since no one thought the grievant was stealing the bus.

Union Business

A worker called in sick and then participated in picker line activities at another of the company's plants. When confronted, she lied about her actions and was subsequently fired for absenteeism. The arbitrator upheld the company, saying that, even though the progressive discipline scheme called for a lesser penalty, her misconduct involved dishonesty, abuse of time, and receiving pay under false or misrepresented circumstances. The union pointed out that the union president had also taken time off to be on the picket line, but the arbitrator noted the president had taken union leave time off and didn't misrepresent his actions.

Smoking on the Job

A worker was caught violating a no-smoking rule, lied about it, and was fired six months later. The arbitrator upheld the discharge, since rules stated that violating the no-smoking rule and lying were both grounds for discharge, and the company took prompt action when it discovered the falsification.

Stealing Company Property

A worker was fired for helping to hide a co-worker's theft of company property and falsifying a report as part of the cover-up. The arbitrator upheld the firing because the workers had lied about his role in the incident when he was subsequently questioned by the foreman and he was subject to immediate discharge under the terms of an earlier reinstatement agreement.

Dental Appointment

A dispatcher reported to work more than two hours late and the lied repeatedly to his supervisor, telling her he had been to a dental appointment. The arbitrator reduced the penalty to a suspension because the grievant lied to hide the fact he was having marital and personal problems, and the lie was such that a lesser degree of progressive discipline was appropriate.

So, some points to keep in mind when handling disciplines that flow from charges of lying:

Lying can alone be sufficient to warrant discharge or suspension, expecially if there's a rule that the employer can quote. Make sure that you check the employer's rule book on how it treats lying or fabrication.
Some acts that resulted in lying may be of such a petty nature that the arbitrator is willing to reduce the penalty. Make sure you determine whether the lie had a serious impact upon the business.
Using sick, funeral, or personal leave for some putpose and then lying about why you took the time off cand lead to problems. Mke sure that your co-workers are aware of the need to be honest about why they took time off.
Wokrers who cover up for other employees may themselves be subject to suspension or discharge, expecially if the dishonest act is a serious one.

--George Haggland. The writer is professor emeritus of labor education at the University of Wisconsin - Madison.

Back to "Knowledge is Power"