This is the second post in a series which deals with policy writing.
Now, after reading Rule number 1 which is be reasonable when drafting policies to govern misconduct, let’s apply another layer to your policy writing.
In addition to being reasonable, it should be relevant as well.
Relevant means it is work related. For any policy dealing with misconduct to stick, it has to have something to do with the work or the performance of work of your employees. This ties in with the second ground found under the just causes for termination (or in this case, for discipline purposes).
Why? Consider this: your policy making powers come from the concept of Management Prerogative. This concept states that you have the power to regulate all aspects of employment. Therefore, if you use this power to create rules, it should remain focused on employment issues where your powers reside. This view is confirmed by the Supreme Court in a number of decided cases.
In case you want to check, here are a couple of citations to get you started:
- Imasen vs. Alcon G.R. No. 194884 October 22, 2014,
- Yabut v. Manila Electric Company, supra note 28, at 105;
- Tomada, Sr. v. RFM Corporation-Bakery Flour Division, supra note 28, at 391;
- Nagkakaisang Lakas ng Manggagawa sa Keihin (NLMK-OLALIAKMU) v. Keihin Philippines Corporation, G.R. No. 171115, August 9, 2010, 627 SCRA 179, 188.
Read on for the 3rd rule here.
Need help with discipline issues?
Hope this was helpful for you. If you need more information about how to conduct disciplinary procedures, I recommend you stop by our book store and grab a copy of the Complete Employee Discipline System. It’s available for sale right now.
