A computer department employee made an entry error that ruined an entire run of co1nputer reports. Efforts to rectify the situation produced a second batch of improperly run reports. As a result of the series of errors, the employer incurred extra costs of $2400, plus a weekend of overti1ne work by other con1puter department staffe rs. Management suspended th e employee for three days for negligence and also revoked a promotion for which the employee had previously been approved.

Protesting the discipline, the e1n ployee stressed that she had atte1npted to correct her error in the early stages of the run by notifying the 1nanager of computer operations of her n1istake. Maintaining that the resulting string of errors could have been avoided if the m.anager had followed up on her report and stopped the initial run, the employee argued that she had been treated unfairly; she was being severely punished but the manager had not been disciplined at all, even though he had compounded the problem. Moreover, citing her

"impeccable" work record and management's acknowledgement that she had always been a

"model employee," the employee insisted that the denial of her previously approved promotion was "unconscionable."

(a) In groups, determine what your decision would be if you were the arbitrator. Why?

(Your instructor will inform you of the actual arbitrator's decision vv-hen you discuss this exercise in class.)

(b) Do you think that the employer handled the disciplinary situation correctly? Why? What would you have done differently?