Hung-over employees and the Web don’t mix
October 30, 2008 by Fred HosierPosted in: Employees do the strangest things, Fun stuff on the Web, Special Report
Apparently, some workers need to be reminded that their social networking Web pages can be read by their managers and HR reps, not just their friends. Probably nothing uncommon about this: An employee with a hangover calls out sick from work.
What makes this story unusual is that Kyle Doyle, a call center employee in Australia, decided to post that on his Facebook page — and his employer found out about it.
On his profile, Doyle wrote: “not going to work, **** it i’m still trashed SICKIE WOO.” (You can see a screen shot of the page here.)
Later, HR asked Doyle, via e-mail, for a doctor’s note for his day off. The request was followed by an e-mail exchange between HR and Doyle which all the world can now read in London’s Daily Mail.
Doyle replied that his contract didn’t require a doctor’s note for just one sick day.
HR responded that his manager had determined that he wasn’t absent due to medical reasons.
Doyle challenged his manager’s call on the matter.
At that point, HR sent Doyle a screen shot of his own Facebook page with his “sickie” plan on it, which probably made him feel sicker.
Do you have any good stories about workers who were caught, through their own stupidity, faking sick? You can share them via the Comments Box below.
Tags: doctor's note, Facebook, sick day
October 31st, 2008 at 9:41 am
We had an employee who forged (very badly I will add) a doctor’s note, writing her out of work. The employee used white out to change an old date on a doctor’s note to the current date. The type of doctor on this note wasn’t even the same kind treating physician she would see for her illness- I think the note was acutally from a dermatologist or something and she had claimed flu symptoms.
October 31st, 2008 at 10:03 am
We had an employee who would limp very noticeably the day before she called in sick. Funny though, the sicn call never involved a leg or hip condition. It was always a stomach virus, headache, flu, or something else. Everyone thought it was a hoot. She had done this three of four time a year for many years. A few employees who would see her limp, would also limp that day. No one every said anything to her because she was only out a few days each year. She is happy, and not limping, in her retirement for the last three years.
October 31st, 2008 at 10:43 am
I had an employee who previously had worked at an MD’s office. She began forging doctor excuses for absences from a pad that she had taken from that office. Unfortunately, she was covering up her boyfriend’s beatings as the reason she was missing work. I contacted the doctor’s office to inquire about some discrepancies in the excuses and they informed me that she was never a patient there – just a former employee. I canned her.
October 31st, 2008 at 10:43 am
Several years ago, while working for a health care company, we received an obviously forged doctor’s note for an employee’s absence. Word of caution: If you plan on forging a doctor’s signature, you should probably make sure you spell the name properly. It was a dead give away.
October 31st, 2008 at 10:47 am
Hey, cut the guy some slack. Really, the guy was sick (albeit by his own choices). Only those who have never had a hangover would think he wasn’t sick. Dumb, yes, but still sickie. We have actually had employees call in and admit they were, in fact, hungover. Honesty counts… plus, if they come to work smelling of alcohol they could be drug tested.
October 31st, 2008 at 11:04 am
Wow, Larry…sounds like your employee needed your understanding and your assistance, and you canned her, probably compounding her problems. Hope you feel good about what you did. Sometimes being the boss requires thinking outside the box and coming up with creative ways to handle what appears, on first glance, to be an employee who is doing something wrong. Best of luck to her, and to you in the future in handling this sort of a situation!
October 31st, 2008 at 11:10 am
I agree with Mel. He was sick. Would you rather he came to work “still trashed”. He stupidly posted the reason online, but at least he had the sense to call in sick.
October 31st, 2008 at 11:11 am
We once had a guy claim he had to be off due to a condition: water on his pituitary gland. I think we concluded that there is no such condition, and the guy was fired a few days later.
October 31st, 2008 at 11:20 am
That employer would probably be sued for wrongful termination here in the USA for several reasons. First, If company policy does not require a doctor’s note for one day absences they cannot single one person out and require it. Unless there is evidence that the person is not sick, such as being seen outside their residence other than at the doctors office. Second, a hangover is a medical illness, self inflicted, but still an illness. Third, social networking sites are not always factual, people put things on them that are not true all the time. Companies must be very careful when using social networking sites when checking on employees.
October 31st, 2008 at 11:39 am
A former employee called in sick with an upset stomach. He had never been sick in 4 years, perfect attendance, so no big deal on my part. His supervisor wanted to fire him because he was absent on a Monday, and insisted on a doctors note before returning to work. The guy did not go to the doctor but brought areciept from the pharmacy for Immodium, charmin and pepto.
Way cheaperfor him than a $20.00 copay.
October 31st, 2008 at 11:51 am
I agree with Mel and Mary. In my professional opinion, the gentleman had a legit. reason for being out sick. Who determines what a qualified illness would be? I have had people call out because of sleep deprivation. They are physically too exhausted to make it in. Make sure your policy is very specific on what requirements are needed to return to work after being out and a specific time frame. My company policy outlines a doctor’s note is required after 3 consecutive days out due to an illness. If you are out for short/long term disability a doctors release is also required.
October 31st, 2008 at 11:54 am
Cat, you have to be very careful as a boss or HR person confusing personal matters and buisness need…especially if the cover up wasn’t disclosed until after the situation happened. In an effort to have empathy to certain sitauations, a leader must also be fair to other employees in thier actions. You’re assuming Larry knew about the cover up before he “canned” her. Also, Dr’s offices take this situation very seriously. If someone forges a Dr’s note, that person could be prosecuted by the Dr’s office and jail time may be involved. If that’s the case, depending on the company policy, she would have been canned anyway. I agree with Larry’s descision. It was a personal matter. The gal made a wrong choice by forging a Dr’s note…putting that Dr in jeopordy (can someone say perscriptions?) and lying about her reason for not coming in to work. It is not her job’s responsibility to help her with her personal issues.
October 31st, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Wow, HR Dude, I am glad that I don’t work for you. I thought we were in the age of being family friendly. I agree that there are some other issues here but your last comment is pretty strong. I get the impression that if she had been honest and told you the truth about why she was out that you would have canned her anyway. I understand that we are being paid to do a job, not to call in sick all of the time, but sometimes life deals us a sorry hand through no fault of our own. I have to agree with CAT on this matter, maybe some compasion could have turned this employee around and helped her move on from the person beating her. As far as the guy posting his personel affairs on the internet, oh well. If you are going to lay it out there, you get what you get. If he was a good employee and was worth keeping I believe a warning was probably more in line.
October 31st, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Hi HR Dude, I was tracking until your final sentence – and it is only that with which I take issue.
While it is not an employer’s responsibility to be an employee’s parent (I draw the line at calling people to wake them up so they are on time), as a company who truly values the employees, we should accept some responsibility for helping people get assistance with personal issues that may be impacting their ability to do their job. Failing to do that (using the mental set of: “Leave your personal problems at the door.”) sets up HR to be viewed as Inhumane Resources. Some of our best long term employees are those we stood with in the times they were walking a lonesome road. I have had several people say, “Because of what you did for me, I will NEVER leave this company.” Liberal use of understanding and EAP referrals can cut turnover costs dramatically.
October 31st, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Monica, if being hungover is truly an illness, like the flu, for example, does that mean that there should be no consequences if an employee calls out “sick” multiple times due to a hangover? Say, every Monday? I see it as a judgment call. “Sickness” is something unavoidable, be it a cold, or even scheduled surgery. Hangovers are due to irresponsibility. At a minimum, the person should have been told to take a vacation day, and if he impacted deadlines, probably more serious consequences would have been appropriate.
October 31st, 2008 at 12:45 pm
I’d like to hear what happened to Doyle?? Was he disciplined? Fired? If so, did he challenge it? What was the outcome?
Are there currently guidelines as to what action can be taken at work for this type of thing — lying about a reason for being absent (let’s not debate whether this was lying in this instance or not) and publicly (in writing) admitting it, or for other misconduct (nudity, obscenity, sharing private company info like salary info, etc.) on a social networking site that is unrelated to work?
October 31st, 2008 at 12:46 pm
For Larry and HR Dude (really?), good employers will step in and at least let the employee know that they are aware the employee has a personal situation that needs addressing and suggest they look into finding some help with their situation. A great employer will have an employees assistance program to refer them to or be willing to assist the employee in finding one. Of course the employee should be reprimanded. But while it may not the be employer’s responsibility to help her deal with her personal issues, the rewards would come in being known as a decent and empathetic employer. While I agree that the doctor’s office may decide to pursue legal action, that is the doctor’s issue. I would fully expect the employer to hande all situations with all employees fairly based on the situation.
October 31st, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Well said Mel.
Dave – If there is a pattern or absences are habitual that is a different matter. The employee should be receiveing counseling from his/her supervisor addressing the absences. By having discussions with employees on attendance or poor performance, we may find there are undlying problems affecting the employee. At that point they can be directed to EAP services, if the company offers it. By reaching out to employees who are going through a difficult time we foster an understanding and loyalty. We are human beings not robots. I hope that you never have to experience a personal issue that requires compassion from your employer only to be met with “that’s your problem, and oh by the way your fired.”
October 31st, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Mike,
Yes, it would be interesting to hear what happened to Doyle. It’s somewhat surprising this much information made it into the general media about this case in the first place. Someone had to send the screen shot of Doyle’s Facebook page and the e-mail exchange between him and the HR rep to the British newspaper where it first appeared. Usually, these sorts of personnel issues are, of course, considered confidential.
October 31st, 2008 at 1:11 pm
All of you defending Kyle Doyel’s “sickness” get over yourselves. He knew he had to work the next day and he drank too much. He expected the same treatment and pay as someone who woke up with the flu. Employees expect way too much these days – sick days are a benefit to employees that get taken advantage of…PTO policy the only way to go.
October 31st, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Well said Mel indeed. Also, victims of domestic violence are entitled to certain accomodations from employers. While it may be the employer’s legal right to terminate, it doesn’t provide immunity from lawsuits based on failure to offer accomodations.
October 31st, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Okay first of all, does HR having nothing better to do than look at employees facebook and myspace pages? I think that we should be discussing the HR manager’s usage of company time verses why an employee called in sick. I mean hung over, sick, whatever. It’s the employees sick day to use it however. What’s the big deal? As an HR Manager, the last thing I sit around doing is monitoring my employees social networks. I do, however, look at potential new hires’ profiles.
October 31st, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Well said Stephanie.
Mary, no one said the guy had an underlying issue. Guy boasted about calling in sick for a hangover – he knew it was wrong. If I had an employee with ongoing attendance/performance problems, I’d encourage him/her to address them and be as understanding as I could be. If I had an employee who called in sick because he was hungover, he’d take a vacation day, or day off without pay. I’d work with any employee who acknowledges a problem and, most importantly, takes responsibiity for it. That’s not what happened here. He tried to pull a fast one and got caught.
October 31st, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Stephanie, I could take exception with your comments. I agree PTO is the way to go (we have PTO) so, calling in sick doesn’t give him some free pass – he would lose a day of PTO. If the company didn’t have PTO, I’m still not saying he gets a get out of jail free card either – just not cause for dismissal unless this is a pattern of behavior. I take exception because, yes, he brought this on himself, but that is not unlike the person who plays basketball, twists his ankle and can’t come to work. True, that is an accident – but drinking too much may not have been planned either. I’m not in tune with canning someone who made one bad error in judgement. Calling in drunk 3 times is not acceptable and would likely result in a mandatory referral to the EAP. The effort though, is not to punish, it is to assist them in getting control over something that is negatively impacting their ability to work. Let’s move on to a discussion of people who come to work ill and infect others – that’s a flaming topic.
)
October 31st, 2008 at 1:51 pm
I’m not defending Doyle, if he really did that. But there are to many unknowns. Was this the first time? Is he an alcoholic who may have protections under ADA? Are social networking sites reliable sources of information? Just because someone puts something on their facebook or myspace page doesn’t make it true. He may have put that on their to impress others. That would be pathetic, but possible. He could be a very introverted person, and this is his outlet to be someone he is not. A party animal!
I don’t think these social networking sites have been fully challenged in our legal system. As an HR professional I would be very hesitant to believe something I might see on any of these sites.
October 31st, 2008 at 1:54 pm
I am astounded at some of these posts. As for Doyle, he lied, got caught now live with the consequences. If he can’t, he shouldn’t have taken the chance, it is called being an adult! As for the lady that was fired because She LIED and too was caught, she should have been fired! Although HR is supposed to be the “softer” side of business, some seem to be losing sight that we are STILL part of the business and therefore need to remember that the business is our MAIN priority! The woman committed Fraud! Whether the doctor’s office does anything or not should have no impact on what we do as a company. If you wouldn’t hire an employee that you knew committed fraud, why would you keep one? Stop hugging the tree long enough to remember that it is up to US, the HR professionals to consider our employees best benefit, but not at the cost or liability of the company.
October 31st, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Re Larry’s employee’s forged doctor notes – perhaps you could have given the employee a written warning (depending on the number of absences) and directed her to some assistance for battered women. While the falsification of documents should not be justifiable under “normal” circumstances, she probably didn’t want anyone to know she was being battered. Many victims are ashamed and so caught up in the cycle that seeking help is difficult.
I think a bit more compassion could have been demonstrated in this case.
For the hangover. . . being hungover is sick. This dope’s mistake was posting it online.
What ultimately happened to him?
October 31st, 2008 at 2:46 pm
What I said was it is not her job’s responsibility to help her with her personal issues. In other words, if she’s not reaching out or disclosing what her personal issues are (again you are all working on assumption), her job can’t and shouldn’t dig and ask what the REAL reason for her being out. She’s being dishonest to the company and breaking the law and company policies on many different levels here. How can you turn a blind eye to that? As Prakash stated, the number one duty of HR is to keep the company out of liability. If you would have kept the girl on and she committed some other type of fraud against the company and it went to litigation. The number one question would be did you (HR) know that she was forging official documents? If so, why did you keep her on? Well, Mr or Ms. judge, we kept her on because after she committed the fraud numerous times, we found out that she was a victim of domestic violence and therefore had a reasonable explaination for committing fraud against the company and breaking the law. So, the judge would ask “so, when you kept her on, you really had no concern that this person would commit fraud with any of the company’s documents? Are you serious?” Yes, your honor, I am serious. “And if you found that anyone else committed fraud against your company and didn’t have the excuse of domestic violence, would you have kept them employed?” No, your honor. “So then, in your judgement, you decided to put the company at risk because you believe that it is OK to commit fraud and lie to the company about being sick because this employee is a victim of domestic violence?” If given the appropriate EAP couciling, yes, your honor.” Then the verdict: The company is liable because they did or should have known that the employee was a risk and didn’t do anything about it to protect the company. Simple counciling for the personal issue surrounding the employee’s reasoning for committing such acts does not establish reasonable liability protection for the company.
October 31st, 2008 at 2:55 pm
In regards to the hangover: A hangover is not an illness. A responsible employee would know that he/she shouldn’t drink heavily the day prior to work. This is something that is preventable. If the employee exercised good judgment, they would not be in the situation they are in. Also, this puts an unnecessary burden on his/her coworkers.
As far as separating the employee, I believe it should be just a write up, or more severe, if this put the employee out from meeting crucial deadlines.
October 31st, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Ah, but if HR is not the side of the business that care sabout the people than the business would not be as successful because, at the end of the day, without engaged employees you won’t have a profitable business. It’s HR’s role to help businesses make decisions that benefits the business! It’s not all about the money. It’s all about the people because, the people make (or don’t make) the business. I’ll give you a real life example. About 10 years ago we got a new leader in our company. We are considered the best in our industry. We were paying in the bottom quartile. You will here time and again that money isn’t a true motivator. I disagree, in part. Until people think they are fairly compensated they can withold productivity in manner so sutle that it is hard to detect. I was singing the mantra, “The people KNOW they are not being paid as well here as they could be paid at our competitors. We need to pay them fairly.” The new leader said, “We are tops in the industry yet we pay at the bottom of the industry?” Yes. He said “That has to change!” Previously the retort has been “If we pay them more, we will go broke.” Well, we dramatically increased wages and guess what? Productivity and morale went through the roof. The soft side of HR, caring about the people, made the difference for the business bottom line. Folks, it’s all about the people.
October 31st, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Two completely different situations there, Mel. How about an example that has to do with liability? I would like to know at what point, Mel, do you say enough is enough when an employee is taking the company for a ride? I wonder how much risk your company is in right now? *Shudder at the thought*
October 31st, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Mel of course it is about the people, ESPECIALLY from our standpoint, if it wasn’t we shouldn’t be in HR, but compasion only goes so far. HR IS about compassion, but based on the laws of the land. She did not seek out assistance from the company, committed fraud and thusly, once it was known by the company, produced liability for the company. It is about the PEOPLE, not the person, what is best for ALL the employees. Our job is not only to provide compassion, but to provide documentation that will stand up in court as well. As for the situation you told us about, I applaude your “new” leader, people SHOULD be paid fairly and I am SURE that when you were deciding what to pay them, as a good HR professional, you consulted the LAWS to determine what was a “fair and equitable distribution of wealth”.
October 31st, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Wow! A lot flying with this one. HR serves two purposes. First to protect the company from liablity by ensuring policies are written in a manner that is legal and protects the employer and acts a guideline for employees as to what the company expects from them. Ensure that those policies are adheared to and applied equally without discrimination. Second, to ensure that the company is not violating the rights of the employees and are acting in a fair and reasonable manner.
If this is done correctly, the company’s liability will be minimal. There will always be employees that will take advantage and sue the company no matter what. The key is in the documentation. If policies are violated document it. If you have a progressive discipline policy, follow it, document it. Begining with the first verbal warning. This is what the courts are going to look at. How has the company handle similar situations in the past. If your documents are in order you should be okay.
Employees are a companies greatest asset. If you remove the human (soft)side, you will have greater turnover which result in huge monetary cost of retraining, lost productivity which will affect the companies ability to provide the goods or services. Which ultimately affects all our jobs.
October 31st, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Hi HR Dude. I feel we are on a different topic – and you may be really stretching in your example… In terms of people who are being unethical and/or exposing the company to risk, I take a pretty firm stance. For us, a core value is honestly and trust. So, a person can make and fess up to an honest $500,000 mistake (yep, it has happened) without any negative ramifications. However, a person who lies or tries to cover up a $1,000 mistake will be dismissed. My industry is one that cannot allow people to cover up mistakes – to do so may, literally, cost lives.
Sometimes I’m at odds with other leaders: Example: We charge more for insurance for people who smoke (another hot topic). We had someone who lied and said he didn’t smoke to get the lower premium. The powers that be only required him to pay the back premiums. I would have voted for dismissal. So, we could stretch and consider that person under your question of liability because they were committing fraud – but we didn’t go there. By the way, my train of thought was… “Well heck, why doesn’t every smoker claim they don’t smoke and get the lower premium. If we only make them pay back premiums if we find out they smoke, it’s worth the chance. (I may not be quite as soft as I seem)
)
I’m the legal guru in my company so I do take liability and exposure very seriously. I’m also the one who has to approve dismissals. I’ve managed to care about the people and protect the company simultaneously.
October 31st, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Mel, saying someone who sprains their ankle playing basketball is the same as someone who drinks too much and gets a hangover is insane. One is an accident – unless you are saying he accidentally got drunk?? If the person was an alcoholic that’s an entirely different situation with ADA – but how the situation is presented suggests it was just a guy that got drunk, was too hungover and then got caught lying to his boss because he posted his lie online.
If it was a one time issue – I probably wouldn’t of fired him, but I would have docked him a vacation day for sure.
On a non HR side – he should have been termed for not being very bright.
November 3rd, 2008 at 9:50 am
Ah, a “hangover” itself is not an illness…but what is a hangover, really, but an upset stomach, a headache, and exhaustion? Are those separately not excusable illnesses? Just wondering. And if he was so sick (I myself have been there a time or two, haven’t most of us?), what the heck was he doing on his computer anyway?? Unless his is parked in his bathroom or something…
And I see what you all are saying about the liability issue with the woman who was abused forging the notes…however, I agree that maybe a warning should have been given, unless the policy was so clear as to forgo that option. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and unless you have been in her boat, you have no idea what you will do to cover things up. HR Dude, you called me out and said that I was unaware of when Larry discovered his former employee’s deception…I guess his use of the word “canned” at the end of his story was what really irked me, and made me feel that he terminated her after finding out what was going on. Domestic abuse is everyone’s problem….too many women and children are killed each year because of that “not my problem” attitude. OK, I’m off the soapbox now.
And “rukidding”, if firing someone for being not too bright was an option, trust me, a certain percentage of the world would not have their jobs…CEOs, regular Joes, and everyone in between!!!
November 4th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Larry, domestic violence is an issue that many people turn their heads and avoid. How would you feel if you had a sister, daughter or even your own mother was a victim of domestic violence? Wouldn’t you have wanted someone to reach out to them and help them. In the Chicagoland/suburb area, there are over 600 cases of domestic violence called in daily. Unless you have had personal experience, you should not be so judgemental. You need to have a heart here. As far as forging, that is wrong, but that is between the doctors office and that person, not you. Maybe this employee needed someone to ask her if she was ok, not “can” her. Have a heart.
November 4th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Although we all should certainly understand and “feel” for her as a recipient of domestic violence, we also need to remember we are NOT DCF nor are we social workers, we are HR professionals and most of you are “keying” into her problem, rather than the FRAUD she committed. If your employee was so starving and hungry that they robbed a store to get money to buy food and you found out, would your rationale still be the same and would you want to still keep the person? Stop allowing your heart to rule your head, business is business, as cold and as hard as it sometimes is. The liability of keeping her is simple, as a company who knows that she has conducted fraud, any further fraud, dependent on the situation, conducted after proof of our knowledge, COULD be construed as “aiding and abetting” a known criminal and although it would be VERY hard to prove, it would be equally as simple to have a case brought against the company. Whether the case is thrown out or not, the “mark” against the company would still be there: explain that to your board/company owners.
November 10th, 2008 at 6:03 am
[...] blogs and Web sites, including this one, recently wrote about Kyle Doyle, an Australian call center employee who allegedly got caught [...]
December 18th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
[...] Hung-over employees and the Web don’t mix. This story turned out to be a hoax. Supposedly, Australian Kyle Doyle called out sick one day to [...]