Termination Documentation

06 August 2018 Labor & Employment Law Perspectives Blog
Authors: Thomas C. Pence

When terminating an employee, an employer should create documentation showing the reason for and circumstances relating to the termination. The documentation serves two purposes. First, it helps the employer remember why it terminated the employee, especially in situations where the original decision makers are no longer with the employer. Second, it will help the employer defend challenges to the termination decision (e.g., a discrimination claim). For example, if the employer has contemporaneous documentation showing it terminated an employee for a legitimate reason like failure to follow safety practices, that documentation will lend credibility to the employer’s version of events and help discredit the employee’s claim the termination was for a different, improper reason.

There are various approaches an employer can take when it comes to documenting the reason for a termination. Ranked from least to most helpful, they include:

  1. Documentation misstating the real reason for the termination (e.g., writing that the employee was terminated due to a job elimination when she was really terminated for unsafe work practices). We have commented before about the problems and risks that are created by this sort of documentation – an employer should not make this mistake.
  2. No documentation. Obviously, having no documentation does nothing to help the employer remember why it terminated the employee and does nothing to enhance the credibility of the employer’s version of events.
  3. A one sentence statement – e.g., “Joe was terminated for engaging in unsafe work practices.” This is certainly better than nothing, but will not do a lot to refresh memories.
  4. A summary that includes the reason for the termination and a short summary of the circumstances relating to the termination. For example:

“On May 30, 2018, the Company conducted an investigation of Joe’s conduct. During the investigation, three employees (Sam Smith, Sara Jones and Mike Miller) confirmed that on May 30 they saw Joe take required machine guards off the X machine and then operate the machine without the guards. This conduct requires termination under the plant rules. Therefore, Joe’s employment was terminated effective June 1, 2018.”

This sort of summary will help to refresh memories and establish credibility. One note of caution. Be careful to avoid the kitchen-sink approach. A short summary is useful but there is no need to overdo it. A summary that is too long risks mistakes.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services

Insights

Do You Know What IMMEX Stands For?
16 July 2019
Dashboard Insights
Does The U.S. Need STRONGER Patents?
16 July 2019
PTAB Trial Insights
California Establishes Fund to Combat Wildfire Threats
15 July 2019
Renewable Energy Outlook
There’s No Place Like Home – But Is That a Reasonable Accommodation?
15 July 2019
Labor & Employment Law Perspectives
Review of 2020 Medicare Changes for Telehealth
11 December 2019
Member Call
2019 NDI Executive Exchange
14-15 November 2019
Chicago, IL
MAGI’s Clinical Research Conference
29 October 2019
Las Vegas, NV
Association for Corporate Counsel Annual Meeting 2019
27-30 October 2019
Phoenix, AZ