A reader writes:
I’m writing on behalf of my husband, Bob, who not too long ago left his job after two years. Throughout his exit interview, he defined precisely why he was leaving. The explanations included his supervisor’s disorganized administration type, anticipating him to reply texts and telephone calls in any respect hours, anticipating him to go online to work instantly after a critical automobile accident, and many others. To be clear, his place was not one which required him to be on name, and these have been all violations of his union contract.
Three weeks after Bob left the job, his former supervisor, Jane, known as in tears to say she had been fired due to what he mentioned in his exit interview. He feels horrible as a result of though he gave true causes, he didn’t intend for Jane to be fired. Clearly he will be unable to make use of her for a reference, however was it acceptable for Jane’s supervisor to place every thing on my husband? He’s now anxious about destroying Jane’s life and the prospect of authorized retaliation.
I can see why Bob is upset about this, however he didn’t destroy Jane’s life. He didn’t even get her fired.
Jane obtained Jane fired.
It is usually extremely, extremely doubtless that Bob wasn’t the one one to complain about Jane. It could be extremely uncommon for somebody to be fired solely as a result of one particular person made these kinds of complaints in an exit interview. If Bob have been the one particular person elevating issues, it’s more likely that somebody would have merely talked to Jane, relayed the issues, and coached her to behave in another way.
It’s way more doubtless that Bob’s complaints have been a last-straw state of affairs — that they’d had critical issues about Jane for some time and this gave them the ultimate push. Considerably much less doubtless — however nonetheless extra doubtless than firing a supervisor after one worker complained — is that they took Bob’s suggestions critically sufficient to start out asking different workers for suggestions about Jane and in doing so found extra issues. Both method, this wouldn’t be solely about Bob’s suggestions.
However even when it have been primarily based solely on what Bob mentioned — which, once more, is unlikely — this nonetheless wouldn’t be Bob’s fault. The issues he raised have been critical and vital ones — in any state of affairs, however significantly the place Jane was violating a union contract. And given the problems with Jane, this wasn’t “she was making an attempt actually laborious however couldn’t lower it, and Bob threw her beneath the bus on his method out the door.” This was a state of affairs the place a supervisor repeatedly violated boundaries and opened the corporate to authorized legal responsibility (re: violations of the contract with the union). That’s Jane’s doing, not Bob’s.
All that mentioned … ideally Jane’s supervisor wouldn’t have left her with the impression that Bob’s suggestions is what triggered her firing. Generally that’s unavoidable although, like if the knowledge that couldn’t have come from wherever else. But it surely’s additionally potential that they didn’t body it that method; for all we all know, Jane may have already been warned repeatedly about these issues however wasn’t listening to the message (like many individuals in that state of affairs) and simply is aware of Bob was linked to the newest concern so she blames him, even when there was a string of the issues already jeopardizing her job.
It’s impossible that Jane may retaliate towards Bob legally. Any reason behind motion she has for the firing can be towards the corporate, not a person worker. In principle she may attempt to declare one thing like defamation, however (a) she’d must show what he mentioned was unfaithful and that he knew it was unfaithful and (b) it’s impossible a lawyer would take that case. You possibly can by no means say by no means as a result of some folks do file nuisance lawsuits, however the possibilities of which can be extraordinarily low, and so they’re even decrease of it going wherever.
I hope Bob will take into account that his issues have been actual ones, he was proper to share them, and his candor was a service to different workers who have been additionally being mismanaged by Jane. And for what it’s value, it’s refreshing to see an organization taking exit interview suggestions critically, since many don’t act on it in any respect.