You make the call: Whistleblower or backstabber?
November 20, 2008 by Fred HosierPosted in: Here comes the judge, Special Report
Was Mary Curlee a hero or a backstabbing co-worker?
Curlee was an administrative worker at Kootenai County Fire and Rescue (KCFR) in Idaho. She thought two of her co-workers wasted too much time on personal conversations and brought the matter to various supervisors.
Curlee claims two supervisors told her to document her co-workers’ behavior that she believed to be wasteful.
For several months, Curlee hand wrote a detailed, minute-by-minute log of what the two co-workers did.
One day, while filling in for Curlee, one of the co-workers found her log and also showed it to the third co-worker.
Curlee often referred to her two co-workers as “Buffy” and “Muffy” in the log. Both women thought the nicknames were derogatory and insulting, and spoke to the Fire Chief about the log.
When the chief discussed the situation with Curlee, she said she would never be able to have a good working relationship with the other two women and that she wouldn’t apologize to them. Curlee was fired.
Is she a protected whistleblower?
Curlee sued KCFR, alleging she was wrongfully terminated in violation of the Idaho Protection of Public Employees Act, commonly referred to as the whistleblower act, for documenting a waste of public funds.
KCFR denied the allegations and moved to have the case thrown out.
The stated purpose of the whistleblower act is to “protect the integrity of government by providing a legal cause of action for public employees who experience adverse action from their employer as a result of reporting waste and violations of a law, rule or regulation.”
Given that, the Idaho Supreme Court ruled that there are genuine questions of whether Curlee was fired for conduct protected under the whistleblower law. It refused to throw out the case. The high court said a jury should now determine whether her employer discharged her in retaliation for her documentation of waste.
Should someone who kept minute-by-minute logs of her co-workers’ actions be protected by a whistleblower statute? Let us know what you think in the Comments Box below.
Tags: fired, retaliation, whistleblower
November 20th, 2008 at 9:47 am
I am certainly in favor of protecting whistleblowers, but I have to wonder how counter-productive minute-by-minute logs were. Keeping these logs must have taken lots of Mary’s time, time the tax payers she was supposedly protecting were paying for. Every time “Buffy” and “Muffy” went off task, so now did Mary, thereby creating three wastes of space.
November 20th, 2008 at 9:53 am
Minute by minute logs do sound like waste. Another good question, in my mind, is where were the supervisors of the alleged time-wasters when all this was going on? Why would they leave it to a peer to document those employees’ inappropriate behavior? Bad management, non-existent leadership.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:37 am
She should be protected because she was asked to keep the log – but she should face reprimand for using derrogatory names to refer to the coworkers in question.
Yet another example of 5 government positions that the “left” tells us are so valuable to the public yet nothing is accomplished by these workers or their supervisors.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:43 am
I agree with JVN. What kind of management asks an employee to “spy” on other employees and what a waste of her time! Management should have stepped in from the beginning and this would not have been an issue.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:45 am
To Ed 3–everything is NOT political. The “left,” the “right,” the “religious conservatives,” etc. Labeling people does not help to bring this country together or to foster cooperation or productivity. There are plenty of government workers who do their jobs well and who serve for the public good.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:46 am
I agree with Lisa. I believe that whistleblowers should be protected but I don’t think that that would apply in this case. While it is a good thing at time to keep track of things in the work place, it is also the job of the managers to make sure that all employees are doing the job that they are being paid to do. Mary taking her time to keep a minute by minute log was certainly a time waster and not to mention in it she was totally unprofessional by referencing her co-workers as Buffy and Muffy. I think this was a case more so of Mary not liking her co-workers and she proved that it was personal when she refused to apologize. Management needs to take a good long and hard look at the issues within their organization.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:46 am
If she was asked by supervisors to keep this log, she should keep her job. But not under the “whistle blowers act”. That was created to prevent retaliatory actions against employees trying to protect the integrity of an institution or company. That she was asked to document is the supervisors fault and they should lose their jobs. Not the employee.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:47 am
You are forgetting the supervisor asked her to keep the log. That cannot be overlooked.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:53 am
Might be worth giving us more information so that we can respond soundly. Given what we have, this individual should not be reprimanded or should not have been fired. She was directed to record the wasteful actions of co-workers. The individuals who wasted their time “Muffy” and “Buffy” clearly needed to be disciplined, if in fact they were taking advantage of time. The Supervisor of “Muffy” and Buffy” should be disciplined and/or given notice. Why reprimand Curlee for using the “Muffy and Buffy”? Clearly this was not intended for use by anyone, was not posted, and they were not referred to these names by anyone except in a confidential report to the boss.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:55 am
While her supervisor asked her to document the time that she believed to be wasteful, I don’t believe that they meant for her to waste time keeping a minute by minute log or refer to her co-workers as Buffy or Muffy. Mary’s actions showed that she had personal issues with her co-workers.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:56 am
The story indicates that Curlee claims she was instructed by two supervisors, not specifically her supervisor nor these 2 co-workers supervisor. That would be questionable. It is also not indicated that the Chief fired her for keeping the logs, but her reaction to the discussion about the logs.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:57 am
Mary should have been minding her own business and not running to a supervisor to complain about co-workers. Shame on the supervisor for having that busy body keep a log. I do not think that Mary is protected as a whistleblower. Complaining about her co-workers and calling them Buffy and Muffy shows a serious lack of judgement. I say the Chief was right to terminate her. I would have done the same thing. Then I would reprimand any supervisor who was not dealing with these silly workplace issues in a timely manner.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:57 am
Even though the employer asked her to keep the log, they didn’t tell her to call her co-workers by nicknames, which is what they found offensive, and what she refused to apologize for.
I don’t think she was fired for her protected activity, but for her refusal to apologize, which I think was a reasonable request under the circumstances, and therefore she was insubordinate.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:58 am
If Mary had focused on her job that she was hired for she may have been productive in a direction that could have placed her in a position of authority. Mary “claims” that supervisors asked her to document her co-workers behaivier but she went over and beyond and made a minute by minute log. If she had but half the effort in her own job and allowed others to sink their own ship she would not have been suffering the well deserved consequences. As far as I’m concerened, personal conversations do not deflect from productivity; but a diliberate act to stop your work to adopt another task that is not related to your position is company time wasted. This is not whistle blowing; this is “Mrs. Cravitz” in the work place.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:00 pm
I think it was wrong to even ask this employee to keep such a log. The supervisor should have gotten involved and discussed the need to not spend inordinate amounts of time on personal business, conversations, etc. If there was a question of whether or not a couple of individuals were “wasting time,” the supervisor could have instructed them to keep a log of their tasks for a short period of time. And the supervisor should have monitored their behavior…not the co-worker. Putting a co-worker in that kind of a position is highly unprofessional and counter-productive in my opinion.
That said, having PUT them in the position of being the sheriff of their co-workers, they should not have terminated her for doing what she was instructed to do. And the monitoring should never have gone on for an extended period of time. Plus, a minute-by-minute log is ridiculous. I agree with Lisa…the log-keeper’s job became the keeping of the log and nothing more, creating more waste.
There is enough petty, childish behavior in the work place without encouraging one worker to “tattle” on another. While it’s important to make sure people feel comfortable complaining and have a vehicle to complain when there are real and legitimate issues, the worker shouldn’t be encouraged to monitor the behavior of a co-worker. They should only be encouraged to bring issues to the forefront and then those issues should be handled by the appropriate people in leadership. By not handling the problems themselves, the leadership made her a whistleblower in a sense. Something that could have been easily handled became a major legal nightmare because of their incompetence. That’s just my opinion…I’m not an attorney, but the whole situation was very poorly handled. A classic case of “what not to do.”
November 21st, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Having worked in government in a supervisory position, I can assure you the wrong decision was made by Mary’s supervisor. Co-workers should never be placed in the position of evaluating each other’s behavior or work behaviors, particularly when it is not a part of that person’s regular job tasks. As noted, it required Mary to take time away from her assigned work to keep the records, and the fact that the “Muffy” and “Buffy” names were used shouts out a number of other issues. Management should have advised Mary they were taking her information under advisement and that she should focus on doing her own job. Then (to show Mary they were taking the report seriously), there should have been a meeting with all employees to stress job expectations and performance levels (it doesn’t hurt to do that periodically anyway), as well as follow-up with each employee individually to ensure understanding as well as compliance. He Said/She Said situations are always difficult to manage, but increased awareness on management’s part, as well as the employees’ awareness that behavior is being observed, should help curb future problems. In addition to Mary’s being reprimanded for the unprofessional behavior she exhibited, the manager should have received a reprimand as well.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:03 pm
I’m with Ed. She did what her supervisor told her to do. How else was it supposed to be accomplished? How else would you document it? To me, she was just being thorough. This is something her boss should have done. Instead he was taking the sleazy way out and having a subordinate do his dirty work so he wouldn’t ruffle any feathers. She can’t be held accountable because of the lack of leadership in her department.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:03 pm
I agree that it was counterproductive for Mary to be keeping a log, but along with JVN — where were the supervisors who should be managing this type of behavior? If an employee has a concern about any one in the organization and they come forward to management, some sort of investigation (informal or formal) should be considered or started. Also, what were the expectations/assumptions given by management to Mary when they asked her to keep a log? Wasting her time on documenting each second that her co-workers weretalking is a complete waste of time and resources in itself.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:06 pm
She was told to document all wastefull time by the two workers – if that needed a minute by minute log then that is what she would have had to do to follow the direction of both supervisors. Her protections under the law are based on this action –
I have to question the coworker relationships – obviously it was a two versus one feeling in the office – things are alsways two-sided – it takes two to tango! Mary alone did not have issues.
I do not see what justification they used in terming her employment. People do not always get along and name calling is not reason to terminate – unless harassment claims are filed.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Despite the fact that Mary was asked by a superviosr to keep the log it does not justify her minute by minute recordkeeping or use of derrogatory names. Her actions do not qualify her for protection under the Whistleblowers Act in that she too was in violation of employment practices. The whole situation was poorly handled. It appears that it may have been in retaliation to her log but more so for her refusal to apologize for how she referenced her coworkers. Those coworkers may view her as someone who harassed them.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Seems to me the Supervisors were just giving Mary the brush off by asking her to document co-workers behavior. Notice there was no planned or scheduled follow up on this request to document. In fact it went on for months! How much evidence do you need? What was the purpose of that??? Why aren’t the supervisors monitoring employee behavior? Asking Mary to document was not just poor management but could easily have been predicted to end badly.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:08 pm
This is quite an unfortunate story. While Buffy and Muffy were obviously doing things other than work it was never mentioned whether they had their work done or not. If they did have their work done and if their work did not directly affect Curlee’s ability to effectively do her job what business was it to Curlee? Was she their supervisor. Depending on the answers to these two questions it is obvious that Curlee could have spent her time looking for/doing more work instead of spending her time keeping a log on what Muffy and Buffy were doing. While I don’t consider her a backstabber I do consider her a busy body looking for more authority than she obviously owned.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Wasted time and bad management. It was the supervisor’s responsibility to have the staff utilize their time economically and to be certain they completed their work; sounds like to much time on their hands. Sorry but Curlee, Buffy and Muffy should all be termed and put the supervisor to work!
November 21st, 2008 at 12:12 pm
I completely agree with R.B.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:13 pm
I don’t think we have enough information to make a call in this case because the article does not tell us the content of the log; we are left to conclude the legitimacy of Curlee’s claim without that information. Having said that, I don’t think that’s the issue. The fact that two supervisors directed her to keep the log – however foolish that was – suggests to me that she has a case.
Consider this: Had the supervisors taken action on Curlee’s log and terminated Muffy and me, they would not have been able to substantiate the reasons for our termination and we would have gotten our jobs back. Rehire Curlee and fire the supervisors for putting her in a no-win situation.
No wonder taxes are so high.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:14 pm
I completely agree with R.B., couldn’t have articulated it better. It was extremely unprofessional of her supervisor to have her keep a log. The woman sounds like she had personal issues with these women and the supervisor asking her to keep the log gave her a sense of power that she obviously was incapable of handling (ie: Muffy and Buffy). The supervisor should have handled the matter directly.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Once the supervisor was informed by Mary of Buffy and Muffy’s actions it should have been the supervisor notating the wasted time by the two women, not the co-worker.
Curlee seems to have wasted alot of time by neglecting her job to spy on co-workers, and I really think she might have ill feelings with these two ladies as well. Because she would not apoligize or bury the hatchet, she now feels like a snitch which is exactly the position the supervisor put her in.
Would have been a different story had the supervisor done his/her job. I don’t think Mary was fired because she was a snitch, I think her termination was due to her reluctance to mend the fence with the other ladies and she would create a hostile enviroment.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:16 pm
The two employees stated the names used for them were derogatory. The problem with this country now is that anyone can say anything is derogatory. She should have not been fired and the fault lies with the supevisor who failed to take action and passed the buck. The fired employee should be compensated for her job and loss of income. Our country is headed down the tubes because people do not want to work and when they are identified as wasting time they complain about something else.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Interesting how two supervisors (obviously not doing thier jobs), two gabbing employees and one tracking all of the gabbing not doing their actual jobs – yet KCFR did not cease all operations and fires still got put out.
How essential are those five positions costing tax payers a minimum of $200,000.00 annually?
November 21st, 2008 at 12:22 pm
My first question is why is a supervisor asking a subordinate to track her co-workers? I consider those actions as a responsibility of the supervisor and firing the employee was not the proper action. I agree she should be reprimanded for the verbage used.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Her supervisor needs to take some responsibilty. Shame on them for not taking matters into their hands and leaving it up to the other employee. That is a management job and when it was brought to their attention, they should have acted on it, not left it up to Mary. And Mary, minute by minute, that is a little overkill. Talk about wasting time. As far as the Buffy and Muffy comment, that is just ridiculous to say that it is derogatory. I feel that name calling is uncalled for, but there are much worse things they could have been called. To make an issue out of the names is silly and takes away from the issue at hand, employees wasting time.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:23 pm
The matter should have been handled by the supervisors directly, she should not have been involved unless she was in a supervisory capacity, or worked directly for the supervisor as the assistant etc. Curlee has a legitimate case claiming she will not have a good working relationship w/ the employees, however, from what is stated, it doesn’t appear she had that good of a relationship with them in the first place, i.e. the nicknames she used to describe them, and the fact that she refused to apologize. Her mistake was leaving the log book where it could be found by others. However, it goes back to the first statement, the supervisors should have handled this issue. I don’t believe she should have been fired, and that all parties involved should be written up and similar punitive measures given to each employee. It would then be the responsiblity of the supervisors to maintain an amicable work environment.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:25 pm
The people I would fire FIRST would be the supervisors, if in fact they told her to document the other two co-workers. Obviously they weren’t doing their job. Although I believe a play by play account of her co-workers was ridiculous, who can say how literal this person was taking direction. A “log” isn’t “notes”, etc. I think she has a pretty good case, especially in a civil service arena. Additionally, I would put a formal disiplinary action in the files of all three of the women. With notice that ANY behavior counter to productivity would be grounds for termination. With people who obviously work so well together, that wouldn’t take much time at all.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Ed,
Firefighters can have a lot of free time on their hands, or go a whole 24 hour shift without sleeping or eating, just depending on emergency call volume. I know, I was married to one for 10 years. Even if Mary, “Muffy” and “Buffy” were civilian employees of the department (the article doesn’t say), this case isn’t really about government waste, though I’ll agree there is a lot of that – attributable to BOTH parties. This is about terrible management, plain and simple.
Whether they were firefighters or civilians, the supervisor(s) should have been paying closer attention and making sure “Muffy” and “Buffy” were using their time effectively. If they are firefighters, not civilian office employees, they should have been using their downtime for station chores, detailing the trucks, etc. If that stuff was all done and they were doing personal stuff between calls, then that was none of Mary’s business.
In ANY case, it was totally inappropriate for management to ask Mary to track co-workers time at all. Just goes to show how much trouble bad management can really bring to an organization.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:29 pm
it was inappropriate for the supervisor to ask Mary to document what wasted time she saw. It was even more inappropriate and a waste of time for Mary to keep a detailed log book for two other employees. I have enough trouble keeping track of what I am doing, never mind two other people…it sure does make it difficult to do a good job and provide value to the customer…oh yeah, the customer. Those are those people who pay the bills…us, the taxpayers, in this case. Sounds like a lot of people should be let go from that department!
November 21st, 2008 at 12:32 pm
I think it can be gleened from the article that they were admin workers – but in any case you state that “If that stuff was all done and they were doing personal stuff between calls, then that was none of Mary’s business. ” It was made Mary’s business when she was followingh the law (reporting government waste) and then the direction given to her by two supervisors.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:34 pm
(1) This sounds to me like more of a backstabber than a whistleblower.
(2) Mary should have been concerned about her job and what she was doing to fulfill her obligations of employment and not worry about her co-workers.
(2) The supervisor should have done his/her job in providing proper supervision to all three employees and never have asked Mary to keep a log.
(4) Mary was keeping track of what the other two were doing, thus wasting time herself.
(5) If nothing else comes of this, I hope this teaches Mary to mind her own business and leave other peoples alone.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:38 pm
I would first take a good look at the “supervisors”. What kind of management training have they had to tell a subordinate to keep logs on fellow employees? To me, this was the catalyst for the entire ridiculous events. There is always an employee who is going to ‘tattle’ on others. that person should be counseled at that time. If the other employees are goofing off, then shame on the supervisors and they should have disciplinary action taken against them. I would not have fired her, after all she was following directions, no matter how stupid they were.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:39 pm
With all due respect, if they WERE firefighters and all their station chores, etc. WERE done, that’s not government waste.
Firefighters are paid to be at their post available if needed, and to go when called. If they have completed all station duties/busy work and there are no emergencies, there is no reason for them not to make personal calls, just sit and talk or even sleep, as long as they are at their post and respond to whatever calls come in.
Speaking of waste, though, I’m outta here. I have real work to do.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:40 pm
There are of course several issues in this story, but IMO only one is relevant to the action in court — was Mary protected, or not protected, by the whistleblower statute? Either way, her motives and the wisdom of her supervisors’ instructions are not particuolarly relevant. She was IMO clearly protected when she first brought the matter to her supervisors. If she was then given the directions she claimed she received (a queston of fact or credibility for the court & jury to decide), then she can’t be faulted – and certainly not fired! – for complying. Employees are only permitted to disobey orders if the order itself is illegal or would require her to commit an illegal act, or if complying would pose an unacceptable risk to the safety of Mary or others. Neither of these exceptions to the “obey now, grieve later” rule is even arguably present, absent evidence that the two co-workers have a history of physical violence and maybe a knife or gun in their desk drawer.
As for the order to apologize — the employer was asking her to apologize for complying with the employer’s own instructions. I suppose an employer (at least a non-union or non-civil service employer) could get away with that, absent the whistleblower component. However, where there is a legitimate whistleblower protection for her actions (which I believe there was in this case) the company looks to be either seeking to humiliate her for legally protected, management-directed behavior, or looking to create an excuse to dump her – or both. Either way – assuming the facts & credibility determinations of the court & jury support Mary’s account of the events — I believe the employer likely will, and certainly should, be found to have violated the whistleblower protection statute, and directed to return Mary to work and “make her whole” for any lost pay, benefits, seniority etc. Depending on the statute in Idaho, there may also be additional damages (punitive, pain & suffering, etc.). And finally, absent some truly egregious misconduct, Mary will be effectively “bullet-proof” for the near to mid-future since any adverse action will be vulnerable to challenge as retaliation for her past whistleblowing and/or her current legal action against the employer. (Alternatively, the employer’s attorneys might just choose to settle the current case — wads of cash in exchange for her dropping the case and resigning.)
November 21st, 2008 at 12:48 pm
She was asked by her supervisor to keep the minute by minute log (although this is poor management) so, she should be protected. However, the question remains: Why exactly was she fired??? Was it because she failed to apologize for keeping the log or was it because she refused to apologize for calling her coworker’s “Muffy” and “Buffy” and saying that she could never have a good working relationship with them? I think that would be the determining factor in deciding whether or not she would be protected.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:48 pm
If they were firefighters then Mary would not have been asked to keep a log!
1. There is a law and when you are hired to a government position you are told that it is everyone’s responsibility to report waste. Mary did that on good faith.
2. Two supervisors asked her to keep a log of all wasted time (not neccessary for on-call employees). She did this as asked.
3. Personal tensions in the office were discovered and Mary was fired for that? Bullsh_t it was for whistle blowing the supervisors and other two employees loved hqaving to do next to no work and colect good pay and great benefits.
Obviously the other two have done something to warrent Mary’s feelings but that is not mentioned.
My father was punished for blowing the whistle and saving the county over a million dollars a year – now he lays low and lets all the wasteful crap happen – he is too close to retirement to risk it.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:49 pm
I completely agree with R.B. The supervisor should have handled the complaint quickly by meeting with all of them together and telling them that personal calls were not encouraged and telling them all to get their work done. The supervisor should have been monitoring them more closely. If the problem continued, then it was up to the supervisor to take corrective action. By involving a peer employee, the supervisor turned the situation into a legal mess and wasted that employee’s time. Exactly, “what not to do!”
November 21st, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Linda nailed it, wasted time and bad management
November 21st, 2008 at 12:55 pm
I guess my comments would be this, her referring them as “Muffy” and “Buffy” was probably to protect herself from being accused of spying on them, by them. As far as the manager, I agree, where was he/she? Lastly, the “minute by minute” account of these to people looks as if Mary was looking for a reason to get them fired, Muf and Buf.
I recently dealt with an employee who felt that I was not doing my job to her standards. She tried everything to try to get me let go and inturn left, unsuccessfully. I not saying that I, like anyone else, are not replacable (if not for my spelling alone).
November 21st, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Speaking of time wasters…look at how many replies are from the same person.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:14 pm
I feel this really does not fall under the whistleblower protection as it is stated now. But she should not have been fired because she was asked by management to do this. The real problem here is poor management. If management suspected or obseved the two employees wasting time, management should have stepped in and dealt with it, not get a subordinate involved.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:19 pm
There are people who can actually carry on conversations and get work done at the same time. Mary sounds like a backstabber to me.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:19 pm
It appears Ms. Curlee had too much time on her hands….i.e. not enough of her own work to do. Who was watching what SHE was doing? Her minute by minute log seems mean and compulsive. Personally, I have an aversion to anyone with a ‘holier than thou attitude’ and the need to control others’ behavior…..they might be better off without her at whatever cost.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Seems like Ed3 has too much time on his hands. Wonder if he’s a government employee or a George Bush operative??
November 21st, 2008 at 1:23 pm
If she had documented ALL time and not used ‘pet names’ I would have agreed with retaliation..however she established a subjective emotional component to the complaint which tarnishes the ‘wasted time log’. All three should have been approached with the ‘harrasing environment’ perception and been given warnings.
The Supervisor is definately in error for improperly investigating and handling the outcome and should be reprimanded.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Cyndi –
The Idaho Supreme Court seemed to think that it likely had whistle blower issues.
The terms Muffy and Buffy would never had surfaced had not a couple of things occured:
1. Mary acting on the law reported government waste to her supervisor.
2. Mary followed two supervisors directions to keep a log.
If I was on the Jury I would side with the employee.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Inept managers. Period.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Inept or not – there is no justification for Mary’s termination.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:41 pm
OK, I don’t have time to read all the responses, but I do want to say, I think the productivity of the employees from then on should have been noted. It’s ok to talk as long as your work gets done and that you at least have justifiable productivity whereas it shows their position is needed. Now, if they spend most of the time standing there and talking, then it’s another problem, they need to be working. Buffy and Muffy is also ok to me, since if you have some visible log with a person’s actual name on it it looks suspicious, but it needs to be turned in with the correct names. The time log was also a waste and the employee should not have been asked to do it.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Poor Mary – she was in a lose/lose situation. If she had refused to keep the log as instructed by the supervisors, she could have been fired for insubordination. It sounds to me like another too familiar case of the supervisors not wanting to do the jobs they were hired to do. The icing on the cake is that they tried, successfully, to manipulate a subordinate into doing their dirty work for them. Most people had rather avoid conflict but when you are the manager or supervisor it is your job to deal with this type of situation. If you are unwilling or unable – Don’t take the mangement job! How can you expect to be paid for a job that you refuse to do? Theses jokers are the number 1 time and money wasters! In regard to the Muffy and Buffy references, I do not understand what is so derogatory. I have known people with these nicknames. Would it have been derogatory for Mary to have referred to these two as Linda and Brenda? So maybe Mary did have a personal beef with Muffy and Buffy but that should have no bearing on whether or not it could be proved that they weren’t doing their jobs as they were supposed to. I, too, have a beef with co-workers who are mega slackers on a daily basis and face no accountability.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:44 pm
The lack of management is to blame for the whole incident. It should have been nipped in the bud. Curlee also should know that their off call time is their time to do what they wan’t. Firefighters only work 24 hours on and 48 off. They average 6 calls a day and have alot of time on their hands to watch TV, workout, sleep or make personal phone calls.
CA firefighter average $90,000/yr salaries with no college education. With pensions to die for. I know. My brothers are firefighters. They are the most overpaid of all county employees. I wish I had known this before going to college and grinding out 20 years of 40 hour work weeks for my $100,000 in the real world. I can’t stand when I see a commercial for another bond issue to raise funds for the poor firefighters. Oh yeah, and they all boats. Gimme a break!
November 21st, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Right Ed 3. No cause for termination – except of the managers who set her up and didn’t do their jobs.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:50 pm
It doesn’t appear that Curlee was fired for reporting the “wasteful” behavior – she was fired for not cooperating (insurbordination?) for refusing to apologize, plus her bridge was burned when she said she would never have a good working relationship with the other two.
Peripherally, I have to ask how her supervisors could justify their positions since they apparently failed to act on the situation (either to stop the wasteful behavior or advise Curlee to stop her recording activity if it was determined there was no wasteful behavior) after several months. Plus, using a non-supervisory employee to record behavior of her peers (especially over such a long period) was, in my opinion, inappropriate since it was an attempt to shift responsibility from the supervisors to the employee – who probably lacked proper training in the first place as evidenced in her time wasted being so anal in her recording.
Looks to me like wasteful behavior by everyone involved but not subject to the strictures of the stated whistleblower policy. Any action warranted should fall under a different statute.
I say throw the case out.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:50 pm
The supervisors should be held accountable for much of this. Curlee was doing what she was told (wasting time or not). She was instructed to “waste time” then was fired for doing so. She took her concerns to her supervisors and they should have followed up, not have her do it. And since when was “Buffy” and “Muffy” derogatory names? Sounds like they were using anything to cause problems for Curlee since their “time wasting” was brought to light. Leadership and time wasting seems to be a problem there.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:58 pm
I believe the reason Mary was fired was because she insisted she would never be able to have a good working relationwhip with Muffy and Buffy. So she’s pretty much saying this situation will never get better and you’ll have problems as long as all three of us are here. Sounds like she was giving them an ultimatum. That’s dangerous to do, unless you are prepared to lose.
November 21st, 2008 at 1:58 pm
I do not agree with the minute-by-minute “spy” logs wherein she made up names for her co-workers but I do think the answer lies in whether or not management told her to do document and report. If they did this rather than properly advise her to how to report the wasted time and rather than investigate the matter themselves, than I think they opened themselves up to a lawsuit. If they fired her for doing as she was instructed in the course of reporting wasted time, then I guess the court should rule in her favor.
November 21st, 2008 at 2:15 pm
This is a lose-lose situation. You have a supervisor who is ineffective and you have three employees who are timewasters. Two employees who spend their time in personal conversation and one who is determined to get even with them because she is not included. Petty office trash that the supervisor should be able to handle. The supervisor is the one that should be disciplined/fired for lack of leadership and inablity to do their job. Delegation is one thing but delegating the essence of the position is wrong. I would recommend that the supervisor be counseled and sent to classes on how to be an effective leader, have them transferred to another division and placed on probation, I would place a strong effective leader over the division in question and leave Mary as part of the group.
November 21st, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Unfortunatly all of you seem to have the same problem as Ms Curlee, the facts please. “Curlee claims two supervisors told her to document her co-workers’ behavior that she believed to be wasteful” that is not the same as a minute-by-minute log. If one of my employee’s came to me complaning about other’s wasteful time I might ask them for specific instances, possible even in writing, especially if I was considering speaking to the co-workers about those concerns. It is possible that the supervisors felt it was a personal issue rather then actual occurance but since the employee brought the issue up they needed to address the facts. Since all the replies address the poor management skills, I would recomend looking inward and rereading the article before jumping to conclusions.
November 21st, 2008 at 2:25 pm
What a sad situation. It certainly starts at the top with failure here! There is no way any leader/manager/supervisor/fire chief should have put this back on the accusing worker. If he/she was any kind of leader, he/she would have held a discussion with the two accused workers and got back with the accuser to say it was handled. End of story. It can be that simple. But, for whatever reason, the higher up people are, the more difficult it seems to be. I can’t figure it out. I just don’t understand why people continue to make a bad situation even worse. Good luck finding another job in this economy to all of them. I do wish people would realize just how bad things are getting and stop the petty stuff and do something constuctive to make a go of this!!!
November 21st, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Dawn –
If I was asked to document all that I though was wasteful and it took minute by minute documentation then that is what I would give.
If I was asked for a documented summary then that is what I would give.
You said you would ask for examples in writing – is that not what Mary did?
There was waste – it was brought to the supervisors’ attention. They did NOT follow through on THEIR responsibilities and instead shifted investigation to a co-worker. I can guarantee that that is not proper protocol.
To me it sounds as if the supervisors as well as Muffy and Buffy had issues with Mary – especially after she brought forth proof of large government waste.
November 21st, 2008 at 2:34 pm
In defense of the supervisor and as a supervisor, I have tried to address complaints from one coworker about another coworker. However, union reps have told me to have the complaining coworkers put their complaints in writing, otherwise it is just heresay.
November 21st, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Dawm, I take it you are in a management position. It doesn’t matter if it were a personal issue between the workers. Part of being a manager is to make sure ANY issues brought to your attention are addressed, big or small, personal or not.
As a manager I address all issues brought to my attention whether I think it is valid or not. One unhappy employee can make for a very unhappy atmosphere. Is a waste of my time? Sometimes? But I have had the same employees for 7 years or longer. I am obviously doing something right. Maybe you need to look inward and reread the article. Also, I tend to believe your name is probably Dawn, not Dawm. You also need to learn to check your spelling before hitting submit.
November 21st, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Been There –
You sound like a great manager – at least from an HR perspective – taking care of all employee issues – Awesome!
I believe that Dawn is a mid manager in a government position – but that is just a guess.
I have worked in government – trust me – I lost my position for blowing the whistle – I was dumb enough to do it while in my year long probation though.
November 21st, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Well Ed you are wrong not in goverment and a minute-by minute log or log of any kind is not the same as documentation, specific instances maybe a paragraph or two explainging what and where she had observed prior to not on going observations. I said it does need to be addressed it is just with whom it needs to be addressed based on facts. I also have had to deal with just this kind of sitution which I find appalling that so many people would skip past the idea that if you bring a complaint against co-workers that you should not be held responsible to verify those details or at least explain them. Why jump to the conclusion that the managment did not do thier job or is it just because you would rather believe that then look for the facts. I ask again where in the article does it ask for this log and where does it stipulate ongoing instances rather then the discussed instances. I completely agree that whistleblowers should be protected but is that the case?
November 21st, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Many of these articles are written with just enough information for the reader to apply their own biases and experiences and come to different conclusions.
We don’t know what the work environment was like or the relationship between the workers. We don’t know what specifically got said, only what was “understood” to be said.
One fact about whistleblowers is that they generally lose, regardless of the laws to protect them. That being said, just because an employee thinks that “fraud, waste, and abuse” is going on, does not mean it is so.
I would be willing to believe that this was a new employee who did not yet fit in with the work group. This employee decided to “tell” on co-workers rather than giving them ideas on how to be more productive with their time and taking the lead and providing the example. The supervisor probably recognized this and realized she didn’t have anything, but told her to come back with documentation. She probably understood that to mean take minute to minute notes. Doing this for months without presenting to the supervisor, sounds fishy. Then she left it out to be found by the co-workers? And remember, it was the employee who said “she couldn’t work with the others after this.”
I don’t think this by any stretch of the imagination falls under whistleblower protection.
November 21st, 2008 at 4:35 pm
The Supreme Court of Idaho disagrees with you about that Mike.
Think about it Mike if you spied on your co-workers even if at the request of your supervisors do you think you would be able to work side by side with them? I do not think so –
Also – where in the story did you see that Mary left the log out to be found?
If an employee suspects waste and reports it – the supervisor wether or not they believe it needs to investigate it on their own!! and let the EE know that they will investigate it. At this point the EE did her expected duty – and the manager can take over. Also, since when is it the EE’s duty to investigate her co-workers and report back with no time frame or reminder from ther supervisor.
What sounds fishy to me is is the supervisor not doing their job and then punishing Mary.
It clearly falls under the whistle blower protection unless of course every single EE the has called any one a name was fired. But I highly doubt that that precedent has been set.
November 21st, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Well said Mike. I find it very sad that so many people would skip over all the possibilities and focus on management, what does that say about the general populace experience with supervision today.
November 21st, 2008 at 4:52 pm
No she is not a protected whistleblower. She was not fired for whistleblowing. She was relieved from her duties for not being able to get along with co-workers. IF she had continued her employment and the other two women made it an unbearable work environment because she had “tattled” on them and THEN she went to the chief and said I can’t work with these two – that is an effect of the whistleblowing and THEN she would be protected. She should have sucked it up and hung in there a little longer – the result would have been the same but then there would be more of a case for her being protected under the whistle blowing statute.
And to the fact of wasting government resources there is no mention of what their job is or what it entails and whether or not the work they were required to do suffered as the result of their personal communications. Unless their employee handbook specifically prohibits personal conversations and unless their personal conversations caused the performance of their job duties to suffer… there is no waste. The keeping of a minute by minute log for “several” months is definitely a waste. If management wasn’t going to do anything in a week… they didn’t care or it wasn’t affecting job performance so the woman that continued to make a minute by minute was the one being wasteful at least with ink and paper.
November 21st, 2008 at 6:00 pm
No Ed the Supreme Court of Idaho did not disagree with Mike, they disagreed with the summary judgement. In short they felt that she should be granted the right to a jury trial. See the website: http://www.lawyersusaonline.com/pdfs/whistle.pdf
November 21st, 2008 at 7:18 pm
Mary sounds like a back stabbing co-worker. All we are reading is her side of the story. It sounds like her boss wanted her to document her allegations, not keep an ongoing minute by minute log of activity. Everyone who works in a larger organization knows the type, nosy, busy body, more worried about what someone else is doing rather than what she is supposed to be doing. She had probably had other issues with her co-workers and tried to get them in hot water which obviously back fired on her. I bet if you knew the real story Mary was the employee who was the actual problem and her boss was just trying to appease her. She deserves nothing.
November 24th, 2008 at 11:30 am
Just a thought here, I wonder if Curlee was set up to fall. I find it quite odd that “Muffy” and “Buffy” weren’t disciplined with all the documentation against them. Also, what or who gave “Muffy” or “Buffy” the bright idea to go through Curlee’s things in the first place in order to find the log?
November 24th, 2008 at 11:42 am
My point that “whistleblowers generally lose” isn’t focused on just the legal outcomes. Many win their cases and then end up owing money. To be a whistleblower has to be an act of “conscience” because in the end, you will probably end up in a new job, possibly a new field, and most of any winnings will go to the state or federal government who will base the taxes on the “whole” award and not just what you take home. So after the lawyer takes his 33%, and your taxes are taken out, you could still owe money to the government.
So you win the point, but at what cost?
November 24th, 2008 at 11:52 am
I hope this department is better at putting out fires than they are at managing people. There are many problems here.
November 25th, 2008 at 12:43 am
Mary is not a whistle blower. Mary is a concerned employee that brought an issue to her supervisors. The supervisors were wrong in telling her to keep a log. That is not Mary’s function and job to keep tabs on her co-workers. It is, however, her job to report things to her supervisor. She was misinformed by her supervisors and the decision by her supervisors set her up to fail. I would not really call these people supervisors because no supervisor would put their employee in this situation unless of course they were setting them up to fall on their face. Mary is not the smartest person in the world for doing this but certainly it is not her fault. Second thing is she should of never have been fired. I dont think she could be protected under the whistle blower act because in order to be protected she should have reported her information to the State Official then it would have been really protected. She can be protected under the EEOC for retaliation, I think this fits the situation better. She could sue for the pay and wages she has lost including any costs that have incurred since being fired. As a Director I would never set my employees up to fail like this; everyone lost here… there is nothing to gain
November 25th, 2008 at 9:11 am
Travis –
Pretty convincing argument based on sound premises.
But in government you are to report things up the chain of command – so her first line supervisor is the person that she should have reported the issue to. It sounds like she should have seen that her supervisors were not going to care about the situation and she should have gone higher in the chain of command.
Hind sight is 20-20
November 25th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Is it THAT insulting to be referred to as Buffy and Muffy? Maybe she was just using her cats’ names as code. That’s not something I would demand an apology for from an employee. Maybe if it was Fatty and Slutty… I don’t think anyone acted perfectly in this case, but I think Curlee should win the suit.
November 25th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
We dealt with a similar situation once long before the whistelblower law went into effect. We had an employee who was always accusing co-workers of various violations. He kept a log and was known to go through their waste baskets at the end of the day looking for evidence of wrongdoing. We disciplined him for keeping book on his fellow employees because of the negative impact it had on the work environment. The union grieved it but it didn’t go anywhere and eventually died a dusty death. However, after we disciplined the employee we sat down with each of the co-workers against whom accusations were made to investigate any wrongdoing on their part. While we found nothing to discipline them for, they were certainly put on notice and it probably improved their own work patterns.
November 25th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
I do not think that Curlee should have been fired, that was an extreme measure and unless there are some other reasons why she lost her job, then yes she should win the suit. I do think however, that I would have required an apology from Curlee for her referencing her fellow co-workers as Muffy and Buffy because it is very demeaning and insulting. And if her co-workers felt that way, then Curlee should apologize.
November 25th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
My response starts out by hinging on one assumption–that the supervisors did indeed give Mary the authority to do the log. If that isn’t the case, then my response would have to be a little different:
If it is indeed the case that a little information is a dangerous thing, then it can also be said that a little authority is also a dangerous thing. If Mary was given a certain authority, then she may have perceived that the supervisors “had her back” on this, and felt that a little arrogance (ie., name-calling) might not be that big of an issue. There is never an appropriate time for this kind of name-calling, but the logic may have played itself out a little better in her own mind then it did in reality.
The problem starts with the supervisors not taking Mary’s initial report of the issue and then taking over control of the situation from there. If control of the situation changed hands then, there would not have even been the opportunity for such liberties like name-calling. Mary made her mistake, but the supervisors should not have set her up for any such opportunity as this.
I wonder what would have happened if the co-workers would not have found the report. Would the supervisors have considered the log as “gospel,” and used as part of documentation or support information in a disciplinary action with them? That wouldn’t have been good, either. Any way it plays out, the supervisors had the responsibility to conduct their own complete investigation of the situation.
If Mary did not receive the authority from the supervisor for completing the log, then that plays against her, as well. The responsibility and fault would have been completely hers.
November 26th, 2008 at 11:06 am
To Jonathan:
My response starts out by hinging on one assumption- that Curlee did indeed THINK that the supervisor gave her the authority to do the log and the supervisor had not.
So many times employees HEAR WHAT THEY WANT TO HEAR. Supervisors are not mind readers. For those who are so willing to criticize the supervisor, how many workers have you supervised “hear thinsg differently than you say them?” If you say never, then you obviously don’t supervise anyone or are delussional. It is most prevalent when the worker is new.
The employee has a responsibility to do the right thing. If the supervisor would have said, “You are right, go kill Muffy and Buffy!” Curlee would have been expected to say, “Wait! That is wrong!” and not comply. So at what level is Curlee responsible for keeping this log which is morally questionable, using derrogatory names, failing to secure this log so it would not be found, and failing to follow up with the supervisor?
Supervisors give directions every day. This is a fire house where they have to be clear and direct and workers are trained to respond to get clarity. There is a problem here, but it is with Curlee. She has a problem with two co-workers, but doesn’t try to work it out. If she has an idea on how to be more efficient or effective with time, one would think she would have shared that with her co-workers. There is no evidence that she tried to get along with co-workers. She tries to get the supervisor to get involved by complaining about them wasting time. The supervisor refuses to be pulled into this drama. He may have said something like “They are both good workers and I haven’t seen them wasting any time. If you have any ideas on how they could do better, why don’t you write them down for me.” This was taken by Curlee as “keep a log.”
November 26th, 2008 at 11:19 am
The longer this goes on the more far-reaching it becomes. As I said in the beginning – we do not have enough information to really make the call, but given what we have I disagree with Mike. The supervisor should address the situation regardless of whether Curlee was right or wrong in critisizing her co-workers. He/she had no business dumping this back at Curlee and the company had no business taking action with Curlee as a result. Period. As a supervisor/manager, I don’t look to my employees to address the inadequacies of others – even if it is their perception only. I would have looked into the situation on my own, determined if there was cause for concern or action – with either party – and moved on.
November 26th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
To maria roy:
I agree that the supervisor should address the situation. I ask you then, given what we know, how could the supervisor PROVE that he/she addressed the situation? Beyond a note in the supervisor’s daily journal that Curlee had a complaint about two co-workers wasting time, what else would the supervisor do? This is a fire department and their documentation is used in courts for arson cases, to justify replacement equipment, used to justify manpower and utilization records, given to emergency reponse teams and hospitals for emergency planning and evacuation. So where on the priority list is Curlee’s complaint?
And if this supervisor spent more that three minutes on this employee’s complaint, then he/she is wasting taxpayers money.
December 17th, 2008 at 11:21 am
[...] You make the call: Whistleblower or backstabber? Marcy Curlee thought two co-workers were wasting too much time, so she documented their work [...]
December 23rd, 2008 at 7:52 am
It seems all of us have waste in our time being everyone is constantly submitting comments and not working on things they should be. No one has even looked at what the company policy was or procedure to be taken so how can you answer to the situation.
December 23rd, 2008 at 9:03 am
Bent Twig –
Some of us can still get the job done while sharing in thoughts and experiences that can help each other grow as HR professionals.
Most of us will put in the work necessary to get all of our work done.
December 23rd, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Bent Twig-
I’m confused…when did training and networking become wasted time for Human Resource Professionals? SHRM puts on conferences that cost thousands of dollars and take up days of time, and I get more from the exchanges on these sites. As Ed says, most or us will put in the work necessary to get our work done.