In essay format ellaborate if you agree or disagree with the answers given and why?

1. Does the presence of constitutional rights for public employees help to improve or hinder the quality of public service? Explain.

I certainly came to the conclusion that constitutional rights for public employees improve the quality of public service in two ways. First, constitutional rights for public employees help protect the employee as well as the organization from unlawful actions by either party. This seems like a basic expectation for an employee and, in the absence of constitutional rights, employees would likely feel less motivated (and thus less productive), as well as potentially more risk averse and less innovative. Secondly, constitutional rights for public employees helps to ensure that public organizations attract and retain talent, which has a direct effect on the quality of public service. Some of the court decisions outlined in the Battaglio text serve to highlight what public sector employment would look like in the absence of constitional rights for public employees, and I for one would not be happy to work in an organization like that!

2. Create and describe an example of poor employee performance within an organization. Then, as an HR manager, explain how you would apply “due process” to this situation. What steps would you take as an HR manager to ensure due process and employee equity are upheld in the management of the poor performance or potential disciplinary action? Explain.

Hypothetically, if an employee has not met established KPIs, the "evidence would be laid out" against them in the form of a formal disciplinary meeting between the employee and his manager, in which the evidence of the employee having not met the established KPIs would be discussed (the employee would be allowed to present his or her side of the issue). From my understanding of the Battaglio text, it appears as though the employee can request a hearing, presumably with a higher level manager/leader in the organization or possibly a panel (I was a little unsure about the details of the "hearings" -- perhaps anyone who has worked in public sector can inform me otherwise) if they disagree with a decision to be terminated as a result of these disciplinary meetings. There was also evidence in the Battaglio text which suggested that if procedural due process is not given, it can result in lawsuits against the public organization -- the example at the end of chapter was that of a terminated public employee who appealed their case all the way to the Supreme Court, which sided with the employee.

As an HR manager, it is important to ensure that proper disciplinary procedures such as consistency and documentation are being followed as they relate to a procedural due process to help ensure equity for employees. For example, if the employee in my case is being disciplined for poor performance regarding KPIs, all employees with similar KPI performance should be disciplined as well. This could be a concern to raise with the manager involved if his documentation does not reflect an equitable disciplinary record. Consistency is also important regarding an employee not being terminated "out of the blue" -- several meetings should be held with the poor performing employee, not only for disciplinary purposes but also for coaching for improvement to try to equip them better to meet the KPIs. As an HR manager, I would even want to see a consistent record of the manager meeting with the employee several times to address the performance issues.