1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | They indicated that their decision to terminate S1 was not influenced out of retaliation against S1 for filing a complaint to the Department but was a result of staff not acting in the best interest for the company. Per review of the Employee Corrective Action dated August 16, 2024, S1 was terminated due to "engaging in unprofessional conduct with S2 in front of clients, other employees, and outside vendors," as evidenced in the surveillance footage which showed S1 having a verbal dispute with S2. Per review of the company policy as stated in the employee handbook on page 42, section "Termination," facility does not follow a progressive disciplinary process and therefore can terminate employees for any misconduct when the facility believes that both staff can not achieve a resolution to benefit the company.
Therefore, based on the observations made, interviews which were conducted, and the records that were reviewed, although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the following allegation: Licensee retaliated against staff for filing a complaint is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED.
An exit interview was conducted with Executive Director Tim Chervanak, Director of Operations Bob Henning, and Human Resources Director Julie Reinhard, and a copy of this report was provided at exit. |