So Betty “BB” Byfield told me about her co-worker who had five children ages 3 – 14 and had just re-entered the workforce. Her husband had passed due to a heart related disease which forced her to get a job that would meet the needs of her family. As she had no personal vehicle, she had challenges getting her children to school and the nursery, and living in Spanish Town, St. Catherine was yet another added challenge, as she could only afford rent in that area.
Her appraisal for appointment rolled around and she was given an additional period of six months (add that to the six months she had already completed) due to her punctuality issues. BB said it was unfair as the facts were:
• Her punctuality reflected not more than fifteen minutes late
• She ate at her desk in order to continue working to account for time
• A number of times she took home her lunch, as in, had NO lunch, in order
to meet her deadlines
• She worked late, most times up to an hour after her shift has ended
BB said these were all the efforts she made whenever she was late for work. There is also sufficient evidence to corroborate this. From an HR perspective, and bearing in mind that she has been going out of her way, can we not be flexible in our approach to this? She needs the extra funds to care for her family and she has made an effort to give back the time. We are not negating the fact that she does indeed have punctuality issues. Can we not have a discussion with her regarding the best solution for AGAIN both the employee and employer benefits? Why we have to throw the book at her re the “letter of de lawwww”? Come on man, flex your conscience muscles and provide an amicable solution, darn it! But… this is how they do it…inna de Gov-A-Ment Yaad…