Frequently Injured: Fire the Person or Fix the Problem?

Frequently injured workers have been classified as frequent flyers, accident-prone or at-risk. While the classification has been created, unfortunately, very few corporations have effective tools to help these individuals. Instead, the path of progressive discipline begins. Rarely is this the answer.

Recently, a plant manager anonymously shared the following with me: “If I had some tools to help this employee, I believe I could have saved his job. He was a great employee when it came to production; he just kept getting hurt. And I was concerned, at his pace, he might lose his life. There was nothing we could do. We had to help him find other employment.”

This has become a frequently shared and visible concern in many organizations, necessitating the creation of individual coaching action plans (ICAP). Through years of research and application in multiple industries, ICAP have been created to effectively resolve such issues. The challenge will not be in the implementation of the strategies outlined below; rather, it will be in ensuring your site is ready, that you have protected yourself from potential negative side effects and have created an approach that fits the uniqueness of your site(s).

CRITICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Prior to discussing the steps of implementation of the ICAP approach, it is important to first consider the following critical considerations:

• Purpose — What are we trying to accomplish with this approach? Are we taking this step because we truly care, or to minimize exposure? Empathy for the impacted individual is critical to succeed and gain the trust of employees in this process.

• Existing perception of coaching — Is there an existing negative perception of coaching? If people already feel coaching is a negative consequence, they might be resistant to the process. Understanding and addressing this perception often is the first step to success.

• Suppression of reporting — If the approach is not properly designed, communication will be poor. If employees feel the intentions of the process are malicious (to punish them or get them in trouble), they might suppress reporting and develop a false perception that the individual coaching process is a negative consequence for injury.

• Existing policies — It is critical that the approach takes into consideration existing policies around discipline and the perspective and involvement of the human resources department to ensure understanding and support.

• EAP — Does your organization have an employee assistance program (EAP)? These programs assist individuals with personal situations and counseling for specific issues. It is critical to become familiar with the existing program if it is determined during this process that there are personal issues that can be best handled by an EAP.

• Who is the coach? — Several different approaches can be equally effective. The following types of individuals can be chosen to become coaches: fellow employees, local union representatives, safety representatives, human resources personnel, supervisors and plant managers. The question is, who is best in a position to help the employee develop the coaching plans (as later described), and who will have direct access to the individual on a frequent basis to conduct the coaching?

• Confidentiality — For the coaching to be effective, the discussions might need to be confidential. Is this a realistic expectation? Can someone truly maintain confidentiality in the discussion if they are acting as an agent of the company? Moreover, what if during the discussions a substance abuse concern is raised? If the individual has to notify other representatives of the company, is confidentiality compromised?

• Communication — How can we effectively communicate with employees to ensure they trust the ICAP approach? Some sites have chosen to communicate the use of this approach only to human resources, the safety department, the targeted employee and his or her direct supervisor. I encourage caution here, as once this information begins to be shared, it might find its way to the rumor mill, where information is rarely 100 percent accurate. I would encourage you to err on the side of caution and formally communicate with employees that the ICAP approach is in use and ensure knowledge transfer occurs. Additionally, if the site is a represented work force, ensure the local union is aware of the approach and, depending on the relationship between company management and the union leadership, has an opportunity to be involved in the design of the process to ensure ownership.

• Training — What is necessary to enable coaches to be successful? The critical skill set often includes interviewing and intervention, performance coaching, counseling, action plan development and familiarity with existing policies, procedures and programs. Typically, this coaching development is more role-playing and practice than lecture.