Wrongful Termination: Understanding Organizational Risks and Personal Grief

In the world of business, it is not uncommon for employers to face challenging decisions when it comes to retaining employees who might pose a potential risk to the organization. This is a delicate balance between protecting company interests and ensuring fair treatment of employees.

Organizational Risks and Discrepancies

One such instance involved an employee who worked with confidential information. As part of their job responsibilities, they had access to sensitive data, and leaks began to occur. Although suspicions narrowed to this individual, it was not definitively proven. Despite efforts to address the concerns, such as having a direct conversation, the leaks persisted. Recognizing the potential risk to the organization, the termination of the employee was justifiable. However, the incident uncovered discrepancies in their resume. Had there been no issues, the manager would not have been looking into their qualifications, and the termination might not have occurred.

After the termination, the organization saw no further issues with confidential information leaks. While the manager could not conclusively prove that the individual was responsible, they felt the need to take action to protect the organization. This situation highlights the complexities of making decisions based on potential risks rather than concrete evidence.

Personal Accounts of Wrongful Termination

Another scenario illustrates the human side of wrongful termination. A friend of the author, a beer salesman, found themselves in a difficult situation. During a weekend with friends, they attended a bar where they sold beer. A verbal altercation broke out after someone his friend didn’t like entered the bar. Feeling a sense of duty, my friend stepped in to break up the argument, thereby preventing a potential fight. Unfortunately, his employer used this incident as a pretext to terminate his employment. Despite evidence presented that showed my friend had not instigated the conflict, the employer called into question the event and dismissed my friend.

This case demonstrates how external disruptions and misunderstandings can have severe consequences. Even with a video confirmation that my friend was not the instigator, the employer's decision was based on suspected wrongdoings, leading to a wrongful termination.

Conclusion

Both instances highlight the importance of clear policies, thorough investigations, and fair judgment in making termination decisions. While organizations must prioritize their safety and security, they must also ensure that these actions are conducted with due process and integrity. Understanding the balance between organizational risk and individual rights is crucial in minimizing wrongful termination and promoting a fair and just work environment.