Firing/Discipline Interview

For our Firing/Discipline assignment, I interviewed Richard Williams, former Associate Academic Vice President over faculty at Brigham Young University, and now President of the Wheatley Institute there. He has experience with disciplining employees that are either faculty or administrative staff. From the interview, I learned how much the Honor Code influences the decisions made regarding discipline or termination, since they are guiding principles of the school and in line with doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

 The process for disciplining an employee is outlined in the BYU policy guidelines. It shows the course of action one must follow when disciplining an employee.  Initially, he addresses the problem with the employee and makes a memo about it.  The memo is typed and printed out, then placed in the employee’s permanent file. The hope is the employee will correct the undesired behavior. If they don’t, then a warning letter will be written to the employee. Richard will also meet with the employee face-to-face and have them sign it if they do not correct behavior. Memos are encouraged throughout the entire process so if it comes to termination, then there will be a documented paper trail.

Richard states he does not necessarily have a witness present when confronting the employee about their inappropriate behavior. If it more serious of an infraction, then he will advise the Human Resource department and go from there.

To Richard, it does not matter whether he disciplines or terminates an employee on a Friday. If he knows the employee is likely to be “hot and confrontational” about it, then he purposely chooses a Friday so the employee will keep that type of behavior at home and not in the work-place. Richard states he has never considered the possibility of an employee losing their job and ending their life (when terminated on a Friday). He is interested if there is research to back this notion up.

For Richard, he does not like to discipline an employee, so not much makes it easier to do.  Richard states what makes it difficult for him is he does not like confrontation. “I don’t function that way and it is not in my nature” to discipline others. Although, he does it because it is a part of his job description and it has to be done, even though “it’s not fun”.  What makes it most difficult for Richard is when the employee isn’t responding much or trying to correct their behavior. Also, if they are dishonest it is hard because it ends up degenerating into two different stories of “he-said, she-said.”

Richard says that he does set a plan of action with the employee to correct the infraction. This way they are aware they are “warned” and it gives them some time to change.

In regards to a probation time prior to termination of employment, Richard states that BYU doesn’t really have a set type of probation. If an employee violates the Honor Code or they are not Temple worthy, they can be put on “probation” for a time in hopes of fixing the problem. If there is a faculty member coming up for “continuing status” or “tenure”, but BYU is pretty sure they will not be receiving tenure, they can receive a time off before they are terminated.

Seniority and experience actually greatly influences decisions regarding termination of an employee. Richard states he helped write the policy to implement a system where employees could be terminated even with tenure. Most often, a senior employee struggling with infractions will be allowed to continue out their employment if they are nearing retirement. Sometimes they can be used elsewhere at BYU and possibly be more successful there. On other occasions, if the infractions are serious enough, the employee can be given a lump-sum of money that would make them “whole”, or as if they had worked the 2 years. 

Lastly, the types of things that warrant discipline at BYU are most often in relation to morals and the Honor Code. For example, an employee with a Word of Wisdom problem would warrant discipline and Richard will give them time and work with them to change that behavior. If there is something as serious as adultery, Richard is more likely to move to termination. He states there are many factors to be weighed when making these decisions: What is the likelihood of the employee changing their undesired behavior? What is the effect or damage done to students from their inappropriate behavior? And, lastly, one must consider the reputation of BYU and how it will be affected if the employee is allowed to continue on or not.

Overall, I really enjoyed this interview and didn’t realize that in the case of BYU, the Honor Code was often the guiding law. (I assumed it applied mostly to the students attending BYU). It was interesting to know that he did not have a witness present for disciplinary action, unless the offense was more serious in nature. I also found it interesting that Richard does not like confrontation, even though his position is high-ranking at BYU. I guess I assumed that leaders felt comfortable with confrontation because they knew it was an expected part of their job description. I also liked learning that Richard would perform yearly stewardship reviews with his employees and would bring up weaknesses to work on during this time.