Jon’s Code of Business Conduct Interpretive foundation Part 2.2

The Section of the Code To Be Imterpreted:

Code 2.2 – Any employee of The Company shall be guilty of misconduct if they disobey an order or directive from their supervisor, unless that order or directive would require that the employee commit some other form of misconduct as described in this code.

Examples of Misconduct Under This Code Section:

  1. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor.  Employee B is having a pleasant conversation with Employee C, but should be working on an important task.  Employee A interrupts the conversation and orders Employee B to return to working immediately.  Employee B admonishes Employee A for the impoliteness and promises to get back to work in a just a few minutes after the conversation.  Employee B is guilty of misconduct under code section 2.2.
  2. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor.  Employee B has had some sort of falling out with Employee C, and is explaining their side of the story to Employees D and E , but should be working in an important task.  Employee A interrupts the conversation and orders Employee B to return to working immediately.  Employee B admonishes Employee A for the interruption and then launches into a new rant about Employee A to Employees D and E.  Employee B is guilty of misconduct under code section 2.2.
  3. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor.  Employee A has ordered all employees to adhere to a set of safety precautions while operating certain machines.  Employee B operates one of the machines in a way which is flagrantly in violation of the precautions, but not really dangerous.  Later, Employee B claims that it was just a joke and that no harm was done.  Employee B is guilty of misconduct under code section 2.2.
  4. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor.  Employee B is working on something which is included in their employment specification.  Employee A decides that, even though some productivity may be lost due to retooling and shifting focus, The Company would benefit more from Employee B working on a different task that is also included in their employment specification.  Employee A orders Employee B to shift to the other task.  Employee B refuses to change tasks based on preference.  Employee B is guilty of misconduct under code section 2.2.

Examples That Are Not Misconduct Under This Section:

  1. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor. Employee B is having a pleasant conversation with Employee C, but should be working on an important task. Employee A interrupts the conversation and orders Employee B to return to working immediately.  Employee B excuses themselves from the conversation and returns to work.  There is no misconduct.
  2. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor. Employee B has had some sort of falling out with Employee C, and is explaining their side of the story to Employees D and E , but should be working in an important task. Employee A interrupts the conversation and orders Employee B to return to working immediately. Employee B excuses themselves from the conversation and returns to work.  There is no misconduct.
  3. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor. Employee A has ordered all employees to adhere to a set of safety precautions while operating certain machines. Employee B suggests to some other employees how funny it would be to use one of the machines improperly and in a way that is non-conformal with the safety precautions.  There is no misconduct.
  4. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor. Employee B is working on something which is included in their employment specification. Employee A decides that, even though some productivity may be lost due to retooling and shifting focus, The Company would benefit more from Employee B working on a different task that is also included in their employment specification. Employee A orders Employee B to shift to the other task. Employee B retools and shifts to the other task.  There is no misconduct.

2017-05-17

Jon’s Code of Business Conduct Interpretive Foundation Part 2.1

The Code Section To Be Interpreted:

Code 2.1 – Any employee of The Company shall be guilty of misconduct if they advance or offer to advance any other employee to a supervisory or management position for any reasons other than that employee’s proficiency in the performance of the work that they will supervise and that employee’s proficiency in the delegation and apportioning to other employees of that work such that it is completed properly and within the required time frame.

Examples of Misconduct Under This Code Section:

  1. Employee A is the son of an influential employee of a client of The Company, and that influential employee has firmly stated that they provide favors in exchange for favors.  Employee B is Employee A’s supervisor and observes that Employee A is not the best candidate for another supervisory position that has opened up, but could perform the work with a little extra guidance.  Employee B concludes that advancing Employee A is in The Company’s long term best interest despite the code violation, and offers the job to Employee A.  Employee B is guilty of misconduct under code section 2.1.  It might at first appear that Employee B acted reasonably, but, in fact, by submitting to the client’s system of favor trading it only encourages further attempts by that client to extort favors which inevitably leads to the enslavement of The Company to that client’s whim.  If The Company ever becomes enslaved as such, then the code of conduct will no longer effectively rule and The Company will have been effectively dissolved and absorbed by the enslaving client.  This code is intended to be self- preseving and therefore Employee B’s decision is misconduct because it steers The Company toward The Company’s dissolution.
  2. Employee A is a talented individual that consistently surpasses coworkers in efficiency and productivity which are indicators of proficiency.  Employee B is Employee A’s supervisor and recognizes Employee A’s proficiency.  Employee B offers Employee A an addendum to their employment specification to perform some leadership functions on a provisional basis, and Employee A accepts the offer.  Employee A demonstrates a high level of proficiency in ordering, organizing, and expediting the work of others.  However, Employee A is diagnosed with an illness and is expected to have long periods of unavailability in the near future.  Employee B decides to test and advance another employee who will be more available.  Employee B is guilty of misconduct under code section 2.1 for advancing an employee based upon availability rather than proficiency.
  3. Employee A is a talented individual that consistently surpasses coworkers in efficiency and productivity which are indicators of proficiency. Employee B is Employee A’s supervisor and recognizes Employee A’s proficiency. Employee B offers Employee A an addendum to their employment specification to perform some leadership functions on a provisional basis, and Employee A accepts the offer. Employee A demonstrates a high level of proficiency in ordering, organizing, and expediting the work of others. However, Employee A has previously  stated that they would never want a promotion. Employee B decides to test and advance another employee who is less proficient without extending Employee A an offer.  Employee B is guilty of misconduct under code section 2.1 for advancing an employee based upon presumed willingness rather than proficiency.

Examples That Are Not Misconduct Under This Code Section:

  1. Employee A is the son of an influential employee of a client of The Company, and that influential employee has firmly stated that they provide favors in exchange for favors. Employee B is Employee A’s supervisor and observes that Employee A is not the best candidate for another supervisory position that has opened up, but could perform the work with a little extra guidance. Employee B concludes that advancing Employee A is not in The Company’s long term best interest and advises other company decision makers that The Company may need to branch out to avoid becoming the captive of the problematic client.  There is no misconduct.
  2. Employee A is a talented individual that consistently surpasses coworkers in efficiency and productivity which are indicators of proficiency. Employee B is Employee A’s supervisor and recognizes Employee A’s proficiency. Employee B offers Employee A an addendum to their employment specification to perform some leadership functions on a provisional basis, and Employee A accepts the offer. Employee A demonstrates a high level of proficiency in ordering, organizing, and expediting the work of others. However, Employee A is diagnosed with an illness and is expected to have long periods of unavailability in the near future. Employee B decides to test and advance another employee who will be more available, but finds them to be less proficient.  Employee B offer Employee A the advancement and the other Employee a temporary on-call advancement for the times when Employee A is unavailable.  There is no misconduct.
  3. Employee A is a talented individual that consistently surpasses coworkers in efficiency and productivity which are indicators of proficiency. Employee B is Employee A’s supervisor and recognizes Employee A’s proficiency. Employee B offers Employee A an addendum to their employment specification to perform some leadership functions on a provisional basis, and Employee A accepts the offer. Employee A demonstrates a high level of proficiency in ordering, organizing, and expediting the work of others. However, Employee A has previously stated that they would never want a promotion. Employee B offers the advancement to Employee A who declines for personal reasons.  Employee B extends an open offer to Employee A which contains provisions to protect The Company’s interest during transitions and periods of uncertainty, but otherwise amounts to an open offer for advancement.  Employee B then extends to another, less proficient employee, an offer for advancement which contains some provisions to protect The Company’s interests in the event that Employee A decides to accept The Company’s open offer.  There is no misconduct.

2017-05-16

Jon’s Code Of Business Conduct Interpretive Foundation Part 1.6

The Section of the Code To Be Interpreted:

Code 1.6 – Any employee shall be guilty of misconduct if they give non-public intellectual property belonging to The Company to any other employee or any other person or company that has not previously entered into an enduring non-disclosure agreement with The Company.

Examples of Misconduct Under This Code Section:

  1. Employee A is a research scientist employed by the company to test a new product as a part of The Company’s patent application for the product.  Employee A is bound by an enduring non-disclosure agreement which covers all data about the new product.  In the process of testing, Employee A realizes that the new product will be vastly superior to any comparable product on the market, and may therefore be worth a lot of money to competitors.  Employee A is accused of some other violation of the code of conduct and is under investigation by The Company.  The accusations are not supported by facts, but Employee A still fears a loss of livelihood even though Employee A has never heard of someone being wrongly declared guilty of misconduct.  Employee A contacts a competitor and gives them a portion of the product so that they may independently varify Employee A’s claims.  The competitor offers a large cash payment in exchange for all of the manufacturing processes and historical data for the product.  Employee A accesses The Company records and downloads the data, then hands it over to the competitor and quits without notice.  Later, the competitor unveils its version of the new product complete with a fabricated development history that demonstrates that they developed the product first.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.6 as well as other forms of misconduct, but may never be punishable under this code.  This example instead demonstrates that additional security measures beyond non-disclosure agreements and codes of conduct should be implemented to physically obstruct the removal of certain pieces of company property and data from the facilities of The Company.
  2. Employee A is bound by an enduring non-disclosure agreement and Employee B is not, but Employee A is unaware of that fact.  Employee A needs some help to complete some portion of their work and gives Employee B access to intellectual property belonging to The Company so that Employee B may help.  Employee B determines that Employee B had agreed to do something that Employee B couldn’t actually do, but doesn’t want to disappoint Employee A.  Employee B sends the intellectual property to an expert acquaintance that doesn’t work for The Company for further aid.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.6 for sharing the intellectual property with Employee B without determining whether or not Employee B had entered into a non-disclosure agreement.
  3. Employee A is bound by an enduring non-disclosure agreement and Employee B is not.  Employee B determines that they can gain a productivity advantage over coworkers if they have access to intellectual property belonging to The Company.  Employee B explains this to Employee A and explains that handing over the intellectual property will make Employee A look good, and Employee A agrees.  Employee B stores the data on several devices which do not meet The Company’s security standards.  Employee B uses the data to gain a productivity advantage and receives a promotion and enters into a non-disclosure agreement with The Company upon the promotion.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.6 because Employee B was not bound by a non-disclosure agreement from the time at which they received the data until the promotion.

Examples That Are Not Misconduct Under This Code Section:

  1. Employee A is a research scientist employed by the company to test a new product as a part of The Company’s patent application for the product. Employee A is bound by an enduring non-disclosure agreement which covers all data about the new product. In the process of testing, Employee A realizes that the new product will be vastly superior to any comparable product on the market, and may therefore be worth a lot of money to competitors. Employee A is accused of some other violation of the code of conduct and is under investigation by The Company. The accusations are not supported by facts, so Employee A does not fear a loss of livelihood especially because Employee A has never heard of someone being wrongly declared guilty of misconduct.  Employee A rationally predicts that the benefit to risk ratio of complying with the non-disclosure agreement far outweighs that of not complying.  There is no misconduct.
  2. Employee A is bound by an enduring non-disclosure agreement and Employee B is not, but Employee A is unaware of that fact. Employee A needs some help to complete some portion of their work and asks Employee B’s supervisor if Employee B is bound by a non-disclosure agreement.  The supervisor tells Employee A that Employee B is not under an NDA and may not be qualified to help.  Employee A looks for help elsewhere.  There is no misconduct.
  3. Employee A is bound by an enduring non-disclosure agreement and Employee B is not. Employee B determines that they can gain a productivity advantage over coworkers if they have access to intellectual Property belonging to The Company. Employee B explains this to Employee A and explains that handing over the intellectual property will make Employee A look good, and Employee A disagrees and explains The Company’s policy to Employee B.  Employee A arranges for Employee B to enter into a non-disclosure agreement with The Company and to receive intellectual property security training.  There is no misconduct.

2017-05-15

Jon’s Code Of Business Conduct Interpretive Foundation Part 1.5

The Code Section To Be Interpreted:

Code 1.5 – Any employee shall be guilty of misconduct if they threaten to or attempt to cause physical harm, slander, or otherwise negatively effect the reputation of another employee for the purpose of extorting personal favors, personal property, money, or career advancement or as punishment for the denial of personal favors, personal property, money, or career advancement from any other person (not limited to other employees).

Examples of Misconduct Under This Code Section:

  1. Employee A and Employee B are coworkers.  Employee A spots Employee B doing something that is considered odd by many other employees but is not otherwise a violation of the code of conduct.  Employee A then approaches Employee B and informs them that what Employee B did was a violation of the “real code of conduct” and offers to keep the observation a secret in exchange for “friendship.”  Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.5.  In this case Employee A is effectively threatening to negatively effect the reputation of Employee B for the purpose of extorting “friendship” which may be presumed to mean “unspecified future personal favors.”
  2. Employee A and Employee B are coworkers.  Employee B’s spouse is the owner of a business from which Employee A wants free products.  Employee A threatens to fabricate complaints against Employee B unless Employee B convinces their spouse to provide free products to Employee A from that spouse’s business.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.5 for threatening to negatively effect the reputation of another employee in order to extort property from another person.
  3. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor.  Employee B expresses an interest in a supervisory position that has opened up within the company to Employee A.  Employee A selects a different candidate for the position.  Employee B, upset with the results of the decision, fabricates and spreads a rumor that Employee A’s decision was not in accordance with section 4 of the code of conduct.  Employee B brags in writing about fabricating and spreading the rumor with specified the purpose of “showing people what happens when they treat me wrong.”  Employee B is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.5 for attempting to negatively effect the reputation of another employee in order to punish that other employee for not advancing Employee B’s career.

Examples That Are Not Misconduct Under This Code Section:

  1. Employee A and Employee B are coworkers. Employee A spots Employee B doing something that is considered odd by many other employees but is not otherwise a violation of the code of conduct. Employee A then approaches Employee B and informs them that many other employees consider that behavior to be odd.  There is no misconduct.
  2. Employee A and Employee B are coworkers. Employee B’s spouse is the owner of a business from which Employee A wants products. Employee A purchases the desired products from Employee B’s spouse’s business.  There is no misconduct.
  3. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor. Employee B expresses an interest in a supervisory position that has opened up within the company to Employee A.  Employee A selects a different candidate for the position.  Employee B, upset with the results of the decision, requests Employee A’s reasons for the decision.  Employee A communicates that the candidate that was selected was demonstrably more proficient and available then Employee B.  Employee B is impressed by the candidates abilities.  There is no misconduct.

2017-05-14

Jon’s Code of Business Conduct Interpretive Foundation Part 1.4

The Code Section To Be Interpreted:

Code 1.4 – If The Company expects to require an extra commitment of work (such as overtime work), then The Company will pay a prearranged monetary compensation for that extra work.

This portion of the code is intended to restore some of the flexibility which could be removed by section 1.3.  The intent is to require The Company to delineate overtime or extra work functions in the employment specification so that The Company can never manuever itself into a position where it is taking more from employees than it is paying for.

Examples of Misconduct Under This Code Section:

  1. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor.  Employee B’s employment specification does not include any provisions for working more than 8 hours a day and 40 hours per week.  Employee A orders Employee B to work overtime to help meet a production deadline.  Employee B has other plans for the time and protests so Employee A says that they will “put in a good word” for Employee B if they stay and work.  In this case Employee A is effectively ordering Employee B to perform a personal favor in exchange for a personal favor.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.4.
  2. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor.  Employee A is going on vacation for a few weeks.  Employee B has demonstrated exceptional proficiency in the work which they perform and in directing others to do the work.  Employee A orders Employee B to perform Employee A’s supervisory fuctions while Employee A is on vacation.  Employee B’s employment specification does not include any provisions to recompense Employee B for the supervisory work.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.4.
  3. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor.  Employee A has a disagreement with Employee B and during the public argument, Employee B makes a rational point which makes Employee A feel like a fool.  Employee A decides to punish Employee B by ordering Employee B to clean the toilets with a toothbrush.  Employee B’s employment specification does not include any provisions to recompense Employee B for cleaning toilets with a toothbrush.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.4.

Examples That Are Not Misconduct Under This Code Section:

  1. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor. Employee B’s employment specification does not include any provisions for working more than 8 hours a day and 40 hours per week.  Employee A needs additional man hours to meet a production deadline.  Employee A writes up an addendum to Employee B’s employment specification with an offer to pay an increased wage overtime work and presents it to Employee B for quick consideration. Employee B has other plans for the time this week, but decides that the additional money is more important and accepts the addendum.  There is no misconduct.
  2. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor. Employee A is going on vacation for a few weeks. Employee B has demonstrated exceptional proficiency in the work which they perform and in directing others to do the work. Employee A writes up an addendum to Employee B’s employment specification to perform Employee A’s supervisory fuctions while Employee A is on vacation for a certain pay rate and offers the addendum to Employee B. Employee B decides not to accept the addendum for personal reasons. There is no misconduct.
  3. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor. Employee A has a disagreement with Employee B and during a public argument, Employee B makes a rational point which impresses Employee A.  Employee A reconsiders their position on the matter.  There is no misconduct.

Other Noteworthy Example:

  1. Employee A is Employee B’s supervisor.  Employee B thinks that they have been overlooked for advancement and wants to demonstrate some leadership ability.  Employee B tells other employees to start coming to Employee B instead of Employee A when they need leadership.  Some of the employees start to follow Employee B’s lead.  Employee A discovers the actions of Employee B and orders Employee B to stop and return to performing the work as specified in their employment specification.  Employee B complains that Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.4 for not paying Employee B for the work that no one had ordered.  Employee B is guilty of misconduct under code section 3.4 for deceiving coworkers into thinking that Employee B has leadership responsibilities.  The other employees should be reminded that any changes in leadership will be communicated to them by the higher leadership.

2017-05-13

Jon’s Code of Business Conduct Interpretive Foundation Part 1.3

The code section to be interpretated:

Code 1.3. – All employees of The Company shall have a prearranged monetary and/or monetary valued benefit compensation for the work for which they are employed by The Company.

This section of the code requires The Company to specify the responsibilities of employees before they are hired.  Once this specification is complete, the act of hiring is the entrance into an agreement in which the company agrees to recompense the employee for that specified work, as long as the employee performs the work as specified and in accordance with this code of business conduct.

Example of Misconduct Under This Code Section:

Employee A is in charge of managing a production facility with many subordinate employees and is in charge of insuring that the facility is properly staffed.  Employee B creates an informed business projection which indicates that the production facility will soon become understaffed if sales continue as projected.  Employee A disagrees with this projection, doesn’t want to risk being seen as negligent, and doesn’t want to have to deal with outside projections from Employee B anymore.  Employee A makes a show of hiring new employees as recommended by Employee B.  Employee A neither informs the new employees of the work which they are required to do, nor trains them to do anything correctly.  Instead, Employee A hands the new hires off to their subordinates for them to make use of as they wish.  The new hires are trained to random degrees and produce random levels of output, but most production is offset by a loss in production of existing employees as the existing employees delegate their work to the new hires.  Employee A turns out to have been correct about the sales projections and the facility is overstaffed.  Employee A then selects subordinates which do not regularly perform favors for Employee A or are not otherwise “friends” with Employee A and terminates their employments for either neglecting to train new hires properly (if they are one of the existing employees) or for not doing their work properly (if they are one of the new hires that was never properly trained).  Furthermore, Employee A wages a campaign to convince other executives of the company that Employee B is incompetent.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.3 because Employee A did not specify the work that the new hires needed to perform and thus left them with no way of knowing whether or not they were doing what they were hired for.  Employee A is also guilty of Section 4 misconduct for discriminating based upon criteria other than price, proficiency, willingness, availability, and adherence to the code of conduct but this guilt can be presumed to be undiscoverable because Employee A and the unfired subordinates could reasonably be assumed to claim it was due to proficiency issues.

Example that is not Misconduct Under This Code Section:

Employee A is in charge of managing a production facility with many subordinate employees and is in charge of insuring that the facility is properly staffed. Employee B creates an informed business projection which indicates that the production facility will soon become understaffed if sales continue as projected. Employee A disagrees with this projection, and explains the reasons why to Employee B.  Employee B revises the recommendations lower based upon these reasons.  Employee A hires a few new employees in accordance with the revised informed recommendation from Employee B.  Employee A insures that new hires are given a specification for the work that they must perform and are properly trained to do the work.  Unpredictable outside forces later affect the market and the production facility is left overstaffed.  Employee A selects subordinates to lay off based upon shortcomings in regards to price, proficiency, availability, willingness, and adherence to the code of conduct.  There is no misconduct.

2017-05-12

Jon’s Code of Business Conduct Interpretive Foundation Part 1.2

The code section to be interpretated:

Code 1.2 – Any employee of The Company shall be guilty of misconduct if they perform or offer personal favors for any other employee or offer or give personal property with the stated or otherwise demonstrable expectation of receiving work, money, personal favors, or advancement in return.

Examples of misconduct under this code:

  1. Employee A bakes cookies and offers them freely to other employees each day until other employees come to rely upon them.  Employee B occassionally enjoys one of the cookies.  Employee B must choose another employee to accompany them on a business trip to an area near the homes of relatives of Employee A that Employee A hasn’t seen in a while.  Employee A hears about the trip and asks Employee B to choose them, citing all the times that Employee B enjoyed the cookies as justification.  Employee B decides to take Employee C who is more qualified to perform the work which will be performed on the trip.  Employee A complains about how ungrateful Employee B is.  Employee A gave personal property in the form of cookies to Empoyee B, then expected to receive a personal favor in return.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.2.
  2. Employee A must occasionally submit work to Employee B for an expert review, but Employee B is very busy.  Employee A has a fast approaching deadline, but must obtain Employee B’s review before proceeding.  Employee A approaches Employee B and offers to give Employee B the use of a valuable and impressive classical automobile belonging to Employee A for a weekend in exchange for getting Employee B to review Employee A’s work instead of the reviews that Employee B already had scheduled.  Employee A is offering a favor in exchange for work.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code section 1.2.
  3. Employee A is being persecuted by a group of people outside of the company for something which is not a violation of The Code of Business Conduct by Employee A, such as Employee A’s race.  Employees B and C see the trouble and make a public show of defending Employee A but not on the principle that all people like Employee A should be defended, then they privately tell Employee A that they are “friends” now and that this “friendship” comes with certain obligations that Employee A must fulfill.  Employees B and C are performing personal favors with the expectation of receiving personal favors in return.  Employees B and C are guilty of misconduct under code section 1.2.

Examples that are not misconduct under this code:

  1. Employee A bakes cookies and offers them freely to other employees each day until other employees come to rely upon them. Employee B occassionally enjoys one of the cookies. Employee B must choose another employee to accompany them on a business trip to an area near the homes of relatives of Employee A that Employee A hasn’t seen in a while. Employee A hears about the trip and asks Employee B to choose them, offering to supply extra work in order to earn participation in the trip. Employee B decides to take Employee C who is more qualified to perform the work which will be performed on the trip.   There is no misconduct.
  2. Employee A must occasionally submit work to Employee B for an expert review, but Employee B is very busy.  Employee A has a fast approaching deadline, but must obtain Employee B’s review before proceeding. Employee A approaches Employee B and communicates Employee A’s needs and learns about Employee B’s other review work.  Employee A then calls a meeting with Employees B, C, D, and E and they work together to determine which reviews need to be prioritized.  Employee A’s work is not prioritized and Employee A must attempt to negotiate with the deadline setter for an extension of the deadline or a waiver of the requirement for review.  There is no misconduct.
  3. Employee A is being persecuted by a group people outside of the company for something which is not a violation of The Code of Business Conduct by Employee A, such as Employee A’s race. Employee B sees the trouble and defends Employee A when possible on the priniciple that all people like Employee A should be defended from such persecution.  Employee C hears about the trouble second hand and decides not to become involved to avoid the risk of retaliation from the outside group.  There is no misconduct.

2017-05-11

Jon’s Code of Business Conduct Interpretive Foundation

In order for a law to be executed, it must be interpreted.  In order for any stability to exist in a system, the law must be interpreted with some degree of consistency.  In a new business code, the law is written, interpreted, and executed by the same owner of the business.  It is up to the owner to ensure that the codes are applied in a consistent and stable way so that they may become a firm foundation rather than a sticky fluid which is sooner flung then built upon.  To accomplish this the simplest method seems to be the conveyance of a few examples of correct and incorrect interpretations of the code which serve to delineate the correct interpretation in future applications.

Interpretation

Code 1.1 – Any employee of The Company shall be guilty of misconduct if they demand or beg personal favors or personal property in exchange for doing the work for which they are employed by the company.

Examples of misconduct:

  1. Employee A is tasked with and aware that ithey are tasked with performing a specialized set of calculations for many projects which are the responsibility of other employees.  Employee B is responsible for one such project and requests that Employee A complete the calculations.  Employee A complains to Employee B about being busy and offers to get the calaculations done in accordance with Employee B’s schedule if Employee B would write a letter of reference for one of Employee A’s relatives.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct in accordance with code 1.1.
  2. Employee A is expected by their superviser to show up to work in order to meet a weekly production quota.  Unfortunately, Employee A’s car breaks down.  Other means of conveyance are available but cost money.  Employee A calls up their coworker, Employee B and begs Employee B to give them a ride to work claiming that if Employee B does not give the requested ride, then they will be responsible for what happens to the company’s production.  Employee B refuses to give the ride, and Employee A attempts to blame Employee B for the lost production.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct in accordance with code 1.1 because the requested ride was a personal favor, and the employee later claimed that they did not do their assigned work because they were refused it.
  3. Employee A is Employee B’s superviser.  Employee B has some vacation days saved up and would like to take a few days off, so Employee B asks Employee A for approval for the vacation.  There is no business crucial need for Employee B to be present on the requested days, but Employee A says they need Employee B to do something for Employee A before they can approve the request.  Employee A tells Employee B to go and mention to Employee C that they have been taking a lot of sick days and to ask why, and then report back with the answer.  The task of investigating such matters, like approving vacation time are tasks which are assigned to Employee A and may not be delegated, and Employee A is aware of that.  Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code 1.1 because the request to investigate Employee C is a personal favor because it is not a part of Employee B’s duties, and the approval of vacation requests is Employee A’s assigned duty.

Examples that are not misconduct:

  1. Employee A is tasked with and aware that ithey are tasked with performing a specialized set of calculations for many projects which are the responsibility of other employees. Employee B is responsible for one such project and requests that Employee A complete the calculations. Employee A states that based upon a projected workload of other higher priority projects, Employee B’s project’s calculations may not be completed on time without extra effort from Employee A, and Employee A will not be capable of supplying that extra effort due to an illness.  Employee B notes these facts and seeks approval for taking the calculations to an outside consultant.  There is no misconduct.
  2. Employee A is expected by their superviser to show up to work in order to meet a weekly production quota. Unfortunately, Employee A’s car breaks down. Other means of conveyance are available but cost money. Employee A calls up their coworker, Employee B and asks for a ride.  Employee B agrees to provide it.  Later, Employee A and Employee B have a falling out and Employee B claims that Employee A is guilty of misconduct under code 1.1 because they begged a personal favor in order to do their work.  Employee A states that they would have offered to pay Employee B for the ride or would have taken a taxi to work if Employee B had refused the orginal request.  There is no misconduct, but Employee B should be monitored lest they slander Employee A.
  3. Employee A is Employee B’s superviser. Employee B has some vacation days saved up and would like to take a few days off, so Employee B asks Employee A for approval for the vacation. There is no business crucial need for Employee B to be present on the requested days, but Employee A says they need Employee B to do something for Employee A before they can approve the request. Employee A tells Employee B to go and work on a time sensitive task that is a part of Employee B’s assigned work. Later, Employee A emails Employee B the notice of approved vacation time.  There is no misconduct, but Employee A should be warned not to make the assignment of duties appear as if they were favors.

2017-05-10