Opinion ID: 220255
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Events Surrounding Davis's Termination

Text: In late September 2006, after the meetings about the rumors and Davis's individual meeting with Cleboski, Rodgers took a call from a customer who wanted to move his cable connection from one spot in his building to another. Rodgers concluded that the customer wanted a relocate rather than a transfer  the former is a noncommissonable service request that gets referred to a different department, while the latter is a commissionable transaction handled by the inside sales team. She therefore sent the call to the billing department. For some reason, the call came back to the inside sales team and Davis answered the phone. Davis spoke with the customer, concluded that he wanted a transfer, and proceeded to initiate a new service agreement with a special promotional rate for the customer. Davis logged a $25 commission in the process. When the customer's manager learned about the sales agreement later that day or the next day, he called back to inquire about the necessity of the new agreement. Davis put the manager on speaker phone, and Rodgers and Coleman both questioned Davis as to whether the customer really needed a transfer and new service agreement. Davis maintained that the transaction was a transfer and sent the service agreement off for processing. The contested service agreement made its way to the desk of Cheryle Parker, who processed agreements and arranged for technicians to complete the requested services. Parker reviewed the agreement and concluded that the transaction should have been handled as a noncommissionable relocate. She also questioned the applicability of the promotional rate Davis gave the customer. Parker expressed her concerns to management. Cleboski responded by asking Rodgers and Coleman about the incident, and they explained that they had questioned Davis's characterization of the transaction. Cleboski then telephoned the customer and concluded from that discussion that the customer wanted a relocate and not a transfer. Cleboski also discussed the incident with at least two other managers, Fraser and Dan Conrad, his superior and vice president of the Business Class service team. The managers agreed that Davis had violated Time Warner's Employee Guidelines and should accordingly be terminated. Before he could terminate Davis, Cleboski had to get approval from a human resources manager, Dionne Archie. Cleboski relayed his version of events to Archie. Archie agreed that Davis's handling of the transaction violated Time Warner's Employee Guidelines, which deem insubordination and [f]alsification of ... business-related documents misconduct for which employment may be terminated at any time without a prior warning. Cleboski then prepared a termination notice for Davis, which Archie reviewed and approved. The termination notice stated that Davis had violated Time Warner's insubordination and falsification Employee Guidelines. It explained, Based on the deception of a customer sale to gain a commission after you were instructed not to do so is grounds for termination. The termination notice also included a section entitled [p]rior disciplinary action, even though Davis's file at worst contained only short notes and no formal corrective actions. Parker testified that before Cleboski gave Davis the notice, she saw Cleboski wave a sheaf of papers and heard him say excitedly, I got him now. It's not the first time, he's done it before and I've got documentation. When Cleboski, accompanied by Fraser, presented Davis with the notice, Davis disputed the accusations against him and refused to sign the termination notice. Security guards escorted Davis from the building. Because of his departure, he was unable to apply for an open managerial position he had planned to seek.