Opinion ID: 200493
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Job Performance

Text: 3 Benoit was a capable worker who consistently received above-average annual ratings for his job performance. His skills and ability were recognized by his former supervisors, David Byrne and Manuel Eugenio, as well as by the owner of TMC, Ulf Heide. Heide described Benoit as a very talented employee who was capable of very good work. But this did not mean that Benoit's experience at TMC was a smooth one. Although Benoit displayed technical proficiency, he was late or absent during the work week for 35 out of 52 weeks in 1996, 28 out of 52 weeks in 1997, and 8 out of 12 weeks in 1998, the year in which he was fired. TMC fired seven employees for excessive absenteeism between 1995 and 1999, five of whom were white. 4 Benoit's annual performance evaluations reflected both his above-average work performance and his problems with tardiness and absenteeism. In 1995 and 1996, Benoit received many ratings of exceptional for his work ability, yet received the lowest possible rating for attendance and punctuality. His boss, Eugenio, frequently reprimanded Benoit about this behavior. 5 On September 23, 1996, Benoit received a formal written warning that identified his lateness as habitual and cautioned him that if it continued, he would be disciplined with a two-day suspension. TMC's employment handbook states that [p]oor attendance and excessive tardiness are disruptive. Either may lead to disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment. The handbook also describes the various kinds of disciplinary action that may be taken at TMC's discretion, including verbal warnings, written warnings, suspension, and termination. Although the section entitled Progressive Discipline indicates that these steps will normally be followed in order, the handbook also states that under some circumstances one or more of the steps may be bypassed altogether. 6 On March 3, 1997, Eugenio, Heide, Teresa Drelick (TMC's Vice President and Chief Financial Officer), and Jim Hansen (TMC's Vice President of Manufacturing) spoke with Benoit about his attendance problems. After this meeting, Benoit's punctuality and dependability improved somewhat. In October 1997, Benoit's performance evaluation noted this improvement but stated that Benoit's attendance still needed work. Benoit's more regular attendance additionally allowed him to compete in the attendance pool: an incentive scheme that allowed those employees who had perfect attendance for one month to submit their names for a cash prize. Benoit won this pool on three or four separate occasions. 7 Despite his improved attendance, Benoit was ultimately fired on March 30, 1998, without any further written warning, and without any suspension prior to termination.