Opinion ID: 203405
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: García's Placement on a Performance Improvement Plan

Text: On June 15, 2004, Vélez decided to place García on a ninety-day Performance Improvement Plan (PIP). Vélez stated that he decided to place García on the PIP because he felt that García had not improved in the areas indicated by Abadía in his evaluation, as well as in several additional areas that I had noticed from my own experience and observations of her performance during the months in which she had been under my supervision. For instance, he noted that he had received negative comments from several persons involved in projects handled by García, including Humberto Cardona, Manufacturing Manager, Victor Mojica, Manufacturing Supervisor, and Frances Montes, Technical Services Scientist. The PIP included a numbered list of García's corrective action steps and job commitments, and stated these would be assessed at progress review meetings. These steps included, for instance: Meet with project team members at least twice a month. Provide meeting minutes and next steps to team members. Complete project within Budget. Provide monthly hour reconciliation per projects executed. The PIP also included a Job Development Plan which set out what García's immediate supervisor would do to assist her, what assistance García would need from other people or departments, what García could do to meet her commitments, and what she should accomplish during the probationary period. Vélez met with García to discuss the PIP on July 12, and that same day she signed a form indicating that the PIP has been reviewed and accepted for implementation. On August 4, García prepared a document for her human resources file expressing her reservations about the PIP. First, García complained that the PIP was issued as a result of her 2003 assessment, to which she had objections. She documented those objections in a second document also dated August 4. Second, García noted that the 2003 assessment was based on the opinions of two women, María Pérez and Vanessa Colón, with whom García claimed she had never interacted during the period under review. Next, García asserted that she had asked Vélez to seek feedback on her 2003 performance from others who had worked with her, but he had indicated that he could not act upon the 2003 assessment. García also complained that the PIP addressed project administration skills that were not mentioned as areas of concern in the 2003 assessment: It addresses Communication, Leadership and Alignment aspects different from the ones described in the performance appraisal. Rafael Vélez explained that the Performance Improvement Plan has to follow this format by procedure and cannot be changed. García's final objection to the PIP was that [t]raining dates are not established to allow for proper planning. As noted above, in a separate document for her human resources file also dated August 4, García objected to her 2003 assessment, which she had signed several months earlier on February 18. She now complained that [g]eneral statements were used to support the summary of performance and capabilities section. She also objected that Abadía never provided direct feedback on presentation skills other than suggesting that visual aids should include all the information to be discussed, which was a contrast from the previous director's preferences. García summarized the work she had done on various projects, requested a re-evaluation, and asked for a larger merit increase in pay.