Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Employee Discipline”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 703 records · Page 39Linked to original sources
PubMed2003

Do something--he's about to snap.

Lynne Tabor, an IT manager at manufacturing giant MMI, has a great team. Everyone works hard and gets along. Everyone, that is, except Max Dyer. Max is a talented programmer, but he's terrible in the interpersonal skills department. So terrible, in fact, that three years ago Lynne reworked his job after employees complained that he was unengaged and even belligerent. Since then, he's been a solid worker, putting in extra hours and meriting good performance evaluations. But recently, Max's coworkers have noticed a change for the worse in him. True, everyone at MMI is on edge after a round of layoffs, but Max's behavior seems like more than a case of the jitters. To make matters worse, reports of a workplace shooting in Seattle are all over the news. Paige overhears Max shouting at someone on the phone. George finds Max pinning up a certificate from a shooting range in his cubicle, and Nicole, who worries they will all end up as statistics of office violence, wants to know how Lynne plans to ensure their safety. When Lynne tries to talk to Max, it's clear he thinks his coworkers are out to get him. And the truth is, they believe he fits the profile of a man on the edge. But what can Lynne do about an employee who has never made so much as a veiled threat to anyone? Commentators James Alan Fox, a professor of criminal justice at Northeastern University; Steve Kaufer, a cofounder of the Workplace Violence Research Institute; Christine Pearson, a management professor at Thunderbird; Christine Porath, a professor of management and organizational behavior at the University of Southern California's Marshall School of Business; and Ronald Schouten, the director of the Law and Psychiatry Service at Massachusetts General Hospital, offer advice in this fictional case study.

Anger↗
PubMed2003

History in the making.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Chief Executive Officers, Hospital↗
PubMed2003

What should the standard of proof be in scientific misconduct proceedings relating to public health service-funded research?

This article discusses the nature and purposes behind the three standards of proof commonly used in the United States. It summarizes the analytical constructs or standards of review courts commonly use to determine the constitutional validity of standards of proof (as well as other procedural protections) in physician disciplinary proceedings. It applies these constructs to the context of scientific misconduct and an illustrative case, and shows that sound policy and morals as well as procedural due process and equal protection provisions of the United States and some state constitutions require the use of the clear and convincing evidence standard of proof in scientific misconduct proceedings. That standard is necessary to protect scientists from misuse of scientific misconduct charges and proceedings, entailing, as they do, vast discretion in bureaucratic officials as well as staggering costs. The imminent rule making proceedings at the federal level will provide a special opportunity to right a wrong that long has been long visited upon academic scientists throughout the United States.

Employee Discipline↗
PubMed2003

A blogger in their midst.

It was five minutes before show time, and only 15 people had wandered into the conference room to hear Lancaster-Webb CEO Will Somerset introduce the company's latest line of surgical gloves. More important, sales prospect Samuel Taylor, medical director of the Houston Clinic, had failed to show. Will walked out of the ballroom to steady his nerves and noticed a spillover crowd down the hall. He made a "What's up?" gesture to Judy Chen, Lancaster-Webb's communications chief. She came over to him. "It's Glove Girl. You know, the blogger," Judy said, as if this explained anything. "I think she may have stolen your crowd." "Who is she?" Will asked. Glove Girl was a factory worker at Lancaster-Webb whose always outspoken, often informative postings on her Web log had developed quite a following. Will was new to the world of blogging, but he quickly learned about its power in a briefing with his staff. After Glove Girl had raved about Lancaster-Webb's older SteriTouch disposable gloves, orders had surged. More recently, though, Glove Girl had questioned the Houston Clinic's business practices, posting damaging information at her site about its rate of cesarean deliveries--to Sam Taylor's consternation. This fictional case study considers the question of whether a highly credible, but sometimes inaccurate and often indiscreet, on-line diarist is more of a liability than an asset to her employer. What, if anything, should Will Somerset do about Glove Girl? Four commentators--David Wein-berger, author of Small Pieces Loosely Joined; Pamela Samuelson, a professor of law and information management at the University of California, Berkeley; Ray Ozzie, CEO and chairman of Groove Networks; and Erin Motameni, vice president of human resources at EMC-offer expert advice.

Administrative Personnel↗
PubMed2002

Bob's meltdown.

Annette Innella is just coming into the lunchroom at Concord Machines when Bob Dunn starts screaming at her. After throwing his lunch tray against the wall, he stomps out, leaving Annette stunned. Naturally, Annette, the new senior VP for knowledge management, is beside herself. She knows her proposal to establish a cross-functional knowledge management committee is progressive thinking for this oldline manufacturer, but Bob's reaction is totally over the line. If Bob stays, she goes--that's all there is to it. Bob is contrite, but he's under a lot of pressure. The general manager of the Services Group, he's just returned from a two-week trip around the globe to gear up his troops to beat revenue targets again, despite shrinking budgets and hiring freezes. And what does he see when he gets back? An e-mail from Annette requesting that two of his best people devote half their time to what he calls her "idiotic" Knowledge Protocols Group. He's carrying the company on his back, and she's throwing this nonsense at him. Graphics specialist Paula Chancellor is surprised. Sure, Bob's gruff, but his staff loves him, and he's the only one of the big shots who ever talks to her. But HR director Nathan Singer is incensed; Bob's never been a team player, Singer complains, and it's time he learned a lesson. CEO Jay Nguyen is in a bind. Bob is his top manager; he brings in all the money. And even though future revenues are going to have to come from somewhere else, Jay is not totally behind Annette's initiative in the current business climate. He can't afford to lose Bob. But if he reins in Annette, it will look like he's condoning Bob's outburst. What should he do? Four commentators offer advice in this fictional case study.

Administrative Personnel↗