Warnings required before termination? New Hampshire

[sv651]

Assume that an organization does not have "at-will" employment because a state statute requires that employees only be terminated for cause.

If an employee's performance has been evaluated as sub-standard and improvements have been demanded but not achieved, how prudent and/ or legal is it in New Hampshire to terminate without ever having given explicit warnings that the employee's job might be in jeopardy?

Have good faith/ fair dealing type considerations been a major factor in New Hampshire employment claims, and if so, would they apply here?

Thanks for any guidance you can provide.

[Pattymd]

What state statute would that be? Are you a public employer? Unions?

[cbg]

But New Hampshire does not have a state statute that requires employees only be fired for cause, so why should I assume that? (At least, not one that applies to private employers)

Is there a CBA in place?

[sv651]

The statute I'm referring to is RSA 202-A:17 Employees; Removal:
"No employee of a public library shall be discharged or removed from office except by the library trustees for malfeasance, misfeasance, or inefficiency in office, or incapacity or unfitness to perform the employee's duties."

So, yes on the public employer; no, on CBA or unions.

Thank you.

[cbg]

We established on your other thread that the statute you were thinking of was repealed over 20 years ago.

[sv651]

I 've certainly been wrong before, but if 202-A:17 was really repealed 20+ years ago, it's hard to see why it would still be on the following website:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/.../202-A-mrg.htm
or why it would be in a handbook published by the AG's office in 2006.

In any event, I'd still be very interested to hear some thoughts about my original question re: the need for explicit warnings before termination, the significance of good faith/ fair dealing type considerations, etc.

Thanks again.

[robb71]

IMHO it makes good business sense to coach and counsel employees prior to termination. At minimum it puts the employee on notice that the job performance is not meeting standards and affords the employee the chance for improvement. Barring a serious infraction (i.e. theft, fraud or dishonesty), this makes a more sound business as employees will be more apt to appreciate company policies and provide adequate notice for voluntary separations. Of course there are exceptions; but I am a firm believer of the giving the employee a *chance*.Also having such documentation at your disposal will better arm you should you wish to contest unemployment for staffers that you separate for *cause*.

[workingstiffwithFM]

Worked nearly a decade with great reviews etc and they fired me for a reason I don't think even makes sense. Says alot about the place in my opinion.

Originally Posted by robb71

IMHO it makes good business sense to coach and counsel employees prior to termination. At minimum it puts the employee on notice that the job performance is not meeting standards and affords the employee the chance for improvement. Barring a serious infraction (i.e. theft, fraud or dishonesty), this makes a more sound business as employees will be more apt to appreciate company policies and provide adequate notice for voluntary separations. Of course there are exceptions; but I am a firm believer of the giving the employee a *chance*.Also having such documentation at your disposal will better arm you should you wish to contest unemployment for staffers that you separate for *cause*.