An Employer’s Dilemma: Poor Performers and Protected Conduct

Jon Hyman writes about a case that offers some relief to employers dealing with the dilemma of terminating an employee for performance problems after the employee engages in some protected activity.

Posted by Joe Gerard in Article on August 18th, 2011
Documenting employee performance and misconduct is important – especially if that employee is involved in an incident that’s under investigation or if you’ve decided to terminate the employee. Today’s blog post by Jon Hyman on the Ohio Employer’s Law Blog uses the case of Galeski v. City of Dearborn (6th Cir. 8/16/11) [pdf] to offer some relief to employers dealing with the dilemma of terminating an employee for performance problems after the employee engages in some protected activity – and why documenting their poor behavior is critical. Hyman writes:

Prior to the City’s termination of Daniel Galeski, he had a seven-year history of well-documented performance problems. Two months prior to his termination, Galeski complained that his male supervisor had been sexually harassing him. In the interim, Galeski’s performance problems continued, for which he received reprimands and written warnings. After he failed to improve, and despite his harassment complaint, the City terminated him.

Hyman notes that the court agreed with the employer and offers two important lessons for employers at the end of the article.

Read More: Terminating a poor performer AFTER protected conduct? Read this post.


Joe Gerard
Joe Gerard

CEO, i-Sight

Spend my days showing off the i-Sight investigative case management software and finding ways to help clients improve their investigations. Usually working with corporate security, HR & employee relations, compliance and legal teams.

Visit Website