As employment lawyer Stuart Rudner says, “If your practice does not follow your policy, then your practice becomes your policy.”
In other words, you may have all kinds of policies in place, but if you don’t enforce them, your culture and standards are determined by whatever conduct you condone. Playing favourites, enforcing policies only seasonally, and disciplining some employees but not others for the same infractions will render an official policy meaningless.
There are companies that get it right, although some prodding may be needed. As a case in point, the daughter of a friend was caught in an unfortunate and completely avoidable situation last year. Let’s call her Claire. She worked for an upscale hotel in Montréal that prided itself on the highest standards in hospitality: fabulous career opportunities for the staff, the best for the guest, integrity, excellence, personal touch, etcetera. You know, the stuff that makes you look great on websites.
Last fall, Claire was minding her own and her guests’ business when she received a rather stern letter from HR, summoning her to an urgent meeting with her manager and HR at 2 p.m. the next day. No specifics were provided, but the gist of it was that a complaint had been received about her conduct, which needed to be discussed and possibly sanctioned.
Well, Claire had no idea what the issue was, and “disciplinary action” could mean anything — from no longer being allowed to eat leftovers in the kitchen or the revocation of her staff discount to termination of employment. So, naturellement, this was a bit of a nail-biter.
The meeting started promptly at 2 p.m. Following the best of bureaucratic practices, the HR manager read from a script.
“Claire, as you know, we adhere to the highest standards of customer service, and all our calls are recorded for training purposes. It has come to our attention that an interaction between you and one of our guests did not meet expectations, and it’s important to us that you understand what these are. We carefully examined the recording, and we will play it for you now.”
Which they did. After listening to the first few words, Claire spoke up.
“Is this a joke?”
“What do you mean?”
“That’s not my voice — that’s Colette, the co-op student who was here last month.”
The meeting broke up instantly, with the manager and HR (both slightly red in the face) promising further investigation. Within hours, it became clear that Claire was not to blame — it had indeed been the co-op student.
Subsequently, nothing happened for several days, and Claire, left in limbo, decided to take action. She sent the hotel’s Directeur Général, who was relaxing in Augusta, the following letter:
Cher Mr. X,
I hereby respond to the letter that was hand-delivered to me on November 2, 2024, in which grievances were formulated against me, leading to my summons to an interview prior to possible disciplinary sanction, scheduled for November 3, 2024.
After verification, it was confirmed that these grievances concerned someone else, not me. I would be grateful if you could provide me with written confirmation that you have taken note of this mistaken identity and that the letter of November 2 no longer concerns me, in accordance with the policies in force. Such confirmation will allow me to maintain a clean record.
Pending your return, please accept my best wishes for your safe travels.
The next day, she received a response in stately French, which I will paraphrase for the readers’ convenience (and to protect the guilty):
Chère Claire,
I am following up on the invitation for an interview prior to a possible disciplinary sanction that was given to you on November 2, 2024, and your email dated November 8, 2024.
A disciplinary procedure had indeed been initiated against you for breaches relating to the application of certain service standards. It was believed that you were the author of said breach, but unfortunately (malheureusement), it turned out that the investigation carried out prior to this procedure was botched. I hereby confirm that no complaint has been made against you and that this procedure is null and void.
In addition to the apologies presented by your manager, I again state our sincere regret for this error, which we realize greatly affected you.
As part of the fallout, Claire’s manager lost his job. Which, while justified, was also malheureux, as Claire had always liked the guy.
However, either you have standards or you don’t, and these had eventually been enforced correctly. Which was important because, as we know, everyone is always watching.
