When supervisors play amateur psychologists
June 19, 2008 by Bill MeltzerPosted in: ADA, FMLA, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views
When supervisors act on their own and don’t communicate with you as well as they should, it leaves you with a mess to clean up and puts the company at risk of lawsuits.
Here are some proven ways to make your own life easier, and keep the firm protected.
Getting help from upstairs
No wants to go over supervisors’ heads, but when upper management is in your corner, it’s much easier to get supervisors to take policies seriously.
The good news: You have plenty of ammo to get the support you need from upstairs. A single foul-up can easily cost your firm big bucks – and it’s rarely due to a mistake by Benefits or HR. Here’s a dramatic example of how easily a situation can spin out of control when a supervisor acts on his own:
A Boston court awarded an employee with bipolar disorder $1.6 million — including nearly $856,664 for lost wages and retirement benefits – due to the firm’s handling of two medical leaves and his subsequent termination for poor job performance (Tobin v. Liberty Mutual).
What happened: The employee convinced the court that his employer failed to offer him the same amount of help it gave other workers with disabilities.
In reality, the firm approved two disability leaves for the employee. So the problem wasn’t with the firm’s policies. Rather, the issue stemmed from inconsistent enforcement by a supervisor. Not surprisingly, the root of the situation was a personality clash between supervisor and employee.
Shortly after he returned from the second leave, the employee was terminated. Meanwhile, another worker had received three similar assistances, with supervisor approval to take leave. The other employee was one whom the supervisor didn’t want to lose.
This situation could have been prevented if the company had enforced a uniform policy on mental disability benefits and re-entry to work. Instead, the supervisor was allowed to give more leeway to a favored employee to take leave to straighten out a personal problem than he did to one he disliked.
Situations like these are hardly uncommon, and many of them end in expensive settlements or drawn-out court battles. One of the hardest parts of being an HR/benefits manager is that you can’t protect your company without the cooperation of employees’ supervisors.
In the real-life work world, there’s a triangular relationship between benefits/HR policies, upper management and supervisors’ behavior. A little fear goes a long way.
The more aware upper management is of the legal risks created by inconsistent enforcement, the more likely the company will take time to write and enforce consistent policies.
In turn, the more supervisors realize their own jobs are at stake if they don’t communicate with HR/benefits about policy administration, the more likely they are to act like you’re on the same team.
Three keys
Let’s go back to the example of a clash between a supervisor and an employee who takes leave for personal problems. There are three key facets to a successful policy for dealing with these situations, according to attorney Jonathan A. Segal:
- Disclosures. Require supervisors to report to HR and/or Benefits all voluntary disclosures of mental health issues, especially ones employees make when called in for disciplinary reasons
- Employee outreach. Have a written policy in employee handbooks requiring them – for their own protection – to come to HR or Benefits first if they think a personal problem could affect their job performance, and
- Inquiries. There should be a specific process for conducting medical inquiries to administer FMLA and disability benefits. It should always be done by HR/Benefits.
Some legal dos and don’ts when you’re handling inquiries: You can say, “We encourage you to go to the EAP to deal with your workplace problems.” Don’t say, “The EAP can help you with any personal problems.”
Reason: Legally, employers must accommodate only disabilities they’re aware of. The EAP, by its nature, focuses on non-workplace issues. But the key is the EAP provider, not you, shifts the emphasis to that area.
However, if you’re already aware there’s a mental health issue – such as for FMLA administration – you can legally ask the same sorts of questions of a therapist you would of a worker’s doctor for a physical health problem.

June 19th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
In my 10 plus years as an employment law mediator, I have found that companies typically get themselves in legal hot water by not doing these things:
(1) Proper evaluation of who they promote to lower management or supervisory positions. These involve things such as psychological profiles, interpersonal skills testing, etc. I have found this to be particularly true when promotion occurs from within the organization. The “good ole buddy” system of a manager getting promoted and then with the help of HR gets a subordinate promoted to his/her former position. I have not done a statistical breakdown of percentages but far more often than not the individual promoted is not qualified to function in a management capacity.
(2) Specific training that involves all aspects of the employment experience. Mention was made of “inconsistent enforcement by a supervisor”. I have seen in my own employment experience and mediated cases where the manager was either ignorant, biased or incapable of discerning what their management decisions were setting in motion. Until it was too late of course!
I have experienced and mediated issues “when supervisors play amateur psychologists”, amateur ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) specialists, amateur discrimination experts, etc. But in my opinion the issue isn’t the employee or the manager/supervisor. The bottom line is the quality or lack there of the top management/ownership of the organization and its HR.
I have witnessed over the years many HR departments in collusion with supervisors and managers progressively work the company into a minefield of litigation.