Is a mass resignation and impending strike a form of nonconformity?

[tomvehoski]

Technically it is probably a nonconformance, but is addressing it as a non-conformance a top priority? Probably not. Personally I would be more interested in figuring out why "the system" didn't detect such employee dissatisfaction and prevent the mass exodus before it impacted operations.

I think many companies are setting themselves up for failure in this are in the next few years. With unemployment so high, they are hiring the overqualified, paying low wages and overworking everyone. When things turn around, there is a huge probability that those overqualified people leave for higher wages, the overworked move to openings where they believe they will be more valued, etc.

 

[Jen Kirley]

I see no nonconformity unless you have a process document stipulating there will not be a strike or people quitting en masse. Nor is customer disruption necessarily a nonconformance.

Now if unqualified people performed critical tasks as a result of these events, we can look at 6.2. If customers complained of problems with product or service that resulted, we could look at why the problems weren't avoided or quarantined so as to not reach customers.

Overall one could look at the human resource process but ISO is silent on the issue of planning via sound compensation practices and management avoiding decisions that rankle a gorup of employees.

This scenario is disturbing but as an internal auditor I would not pass the straight-face test if I assigned nonconformance(s) based on the information provided.

 

[Jen Kirley]

The fact that *such things happen* doesn't take anything away from the observation being regarded as a non-conformity. If a failure in the system leads to disruption of services to Customer and if that is not a non-conformity, what else is...?

The nonconformance is to be directed at the problem, and this consequence doesn't justify a nonconformance in my view. I can understand the contingency idea, and a contingency could be to contract with an engineerng service. But groups quitting over management's decisions isn't something I'd expect to see planned for in order to meet customer requirements.

 

[lennon121]

Was the customer affected? If so then the top tier management of your company need to realise the seriousness of this, no customers no income.

To be honest you see this everyday in different jobs (postal, airlines) thats probably why you will not find the likes of royal mail with quality certifications, why? because customer response is disgraceful and they would never get certified!

 

[Helmut Jilling]

Let's suppose you and I worked together. You are in the Quality Department.

I am a senior manager and I've had a lot of my staff quit. I've heard that people are unhappy about their salary and they don't want to grow with the company at our other location. We've called the customers affected by the disruption the members of staff caused and in less than a week we've got it under control. The customers all understand. I'm busily working with HR to try to find replacements for these members of staff who walked out on a perfectly good job!

Now, what would you like me to do with your non-conformance?

Hi Andy,

I don't feel strongly that it should be written up, but I'll take a stab and defend that point of view...

Remember folks, a corrective action form is supposed to be a problem solving aid. It is not a form you have to fill out when you are bad... Thus, it is a tool to help you figure out serious problems. The scenario the OP posted was a serious case. Even if mgt is "very busy working with HR to find replacements..." maybe it would benefit them to sit down and try to analyse the root causes, before they move too fast.

It would not necessarily be a requirement that a CAR be written, ...agreed. But, it may be darn useful and eye-opening to do so.

 

[Chennaiite]

Let's suppose you and I worked together. You are in the Quality Department.

I am a senior manager and I've had a lot of my staff quit. I've heard that people are unhappy about their salary and they don't want to grow with the company at our other location. We've called the customers affected by the disruption the members of staff caused and in less than a week we've got it under control. The customers all understand. I'm busily working with HR to try to find replacements for these members of staff who walked out on a perfectly good job!

Now, what would you like me to do with your non-conformance?

The nonconformance is to be directed at the problem, and this consequence doesn't justify a nonconformance in my view. I can understand the contingency idea, and a contingency could be to contract with an engineerng service. But groups quitting over management's decisions isn't something I'd expect to see planned for in order to meet customer requirements.

It is high time Organization such as these shall start focussing on Employee Motivation - ISO/TS 6.2.2.4. True, raise in salary could be a key contributor for holding employees(in OP's case) which only the Top Management concerned can decide. But wouldn't you agree that activities in place to Motivate employees can achieve at least half of what Salary can do? In the end, only *the* Top Management will be in a better position to analyse what can bring back to normal the attrition rate.

But if unattended(or not forced to attend), the situation can come back to haunt the Organization and the Customers. Practically may be a tough one, but a much needed one, IMO.

 

[arios]

For many organizations measuring employee turn over constitutes a metric to assess the performance of the HR and management functions. From that point of view, the high turn over rate represents a datum which requires attention, analysis and very likely corrective action. The event itself of abrupt and massive resignation may have a direct impact on customer satisfaction and the timely delivery product or service can be compromised, thus the QMS is being affectedm as such Corrective Action is appropriate.

Besides, this issue constitutes not only an administrative problem, it affects also the company's reputation and public image. It affects costs too as new staff will need to found and retrained.

Possible causes can include:
a) Under paid employees (or perception of being underpaid)
b) Employees believe they are overqualified (it happens )
c) Revenge attitude vs. management due to poor work environment or inadequate supervision .
d) Inadequate hiring process.
e) Employees could have been created expectations which were not fulfilled
f) The salaries/benefits at the organization are not competitive on the region.
g) A trouble maker (assignable cause) who is promoting a rebellion among the employees.

I don't believe employees should be spoiled giving them whatever they ask for, instead it should be a win-win process where they receive a job and growth opportunities, but they should do their part to develop themselves and earn what they receive.

Analyze what changed before and after the issue happened. Hope the issue can be successfully resolved. I have seen extreme cases where even a new HR Manager is hired to start over and promote change. Not that this is a Corrective Action per se, but it is an admin action that management can consider too.

 

[Jen Kirley]

It is high time Organization such as these shall start focussing on Employee Motivation - ISO/TS 6.2.2.4. True, raise in salary could be a key contributor for holding employees(in OP's case) which only the Top Management concerned can decide. But wouldn't you agree that activities in place to Motivate employees can achieve at least half of what Salary can do? In the end, only *the* Top Management will be in a better position to analyse what can bring back to normal the attrition rate.

But if unattended(or not forced to attend), the situation can come back to haunt the Organization and the Customers. Practically may be a tough one, but a much needed one, IMO.

These are all valid, important and well stated points. And if an organization wants to self issue a nonconformance to manage the problem solving process, by all means.

But I am an auditor as well as a holder of a Masters certificate in Human Resources. And while this scenario really does seem to indicate serious dysfunction in the HR process, it is atypical - and unnerving - to think a nonconformance is necessary for management to address what is clearly a problematic process when its managers should be self motivated to do so. I would hope a mass rebellion like this would jolt them into active introspection, but the fact matters have progressed to this point hints to me that management has a bigger problem than not knowing how to utilize its human assets.

 

[NoAvailableUserName]

What's non-conforming here? Such things happen, but low salary and not transferring aren't qms compliance issues. Another way to look at it is, what would you accomplish by recording this? Some action on management's part? I'd worry if I would end up standing in the same unemployment line as the folks who quit...

The management has a plan of outsourcing its services that would mean a lot of people would be gone from the company. The head of employee association said that they are not longer for higher wages but just for job security. He added that embarking on a strike was the worst-case scenario to prompt the Labor Department to become involved.
[FONT=&quot]Isn’t it compliance to statutory and regulatory requirements (e.g. Labor code) must be demonstrated by the organization?[/FONT]

 

[scoraccio]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]For four days, some transactions were canceled or disrupted as technical people resigned. Though the management have taken action and its operations were now back to normal, it is feared that more resignations might follow soon. [/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Reasons for leaving:[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]1) Low salary[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]2) [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]These employees revealed that the mass resignation began with the forced resignation of 11 technical people who earlier refused to be transferred to another company, a small one also owned by their existing company. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I think this case will fall under 8.5.3. [/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]What are your thoughts?[/FONT]

As a Registration auditor I wouldn't write this as a nonconformity in a million years.

I'm not saying there isn't some problem here - but it strikes me that the evidence for such a claim against ISO 9001 is problematic, at best.

What would be the benefit of such an accusation?