Manager's Outbursts, Threats Must Stop Immediately

L.A. Times Archives

Oct. 9, 1995 12 AM PT

D o you have a question about an on-the-job situation? If so, please mail it to Shop Talk, Los Angeles Times, P.O. Box 2008, Costa Mesa, CA 92626. Or call (714) 966-7873 and leave a voice-mail message with your name and where you live. Questions of general interest will be answered in this column on Mondays.

Q: My manager has a problem controlling her frustrations at work. She often takes out her anger by calling the employees “stupid” or referring to them as “slackers.”

I have heard her tell employees, “I’m going to kill you,” and I wonder if I should report her to human resources. She often flies off the handle and accuses people before she knows she is right.

What would be my best approach for dealing with this problem?

--L.P., Cerritos

A: Your manager’s behavior is extremely unprofessional and needs to stop immediately. It is important for her to know how negatively her behavior is viewed by employees.

If she is approachable, you might want to draw her attention to how her behavior might be adversely affecting employee morale.

If you feel you cannot discuss the issue with your manager, then you should definitely report the problem to either her superior or to your human resources department.

It is very important that managers behave professionally and treat the employees they supervise with respect.

A manager who continually threatens or browbeats employees is not doing his or her job, and such behavior should not be tolerated in the workplace.

It is quite possible that her superior is unaware of her behavior, and her subordinates may be the only ones who can bring needed attention to the situation.

--Ron Riggio, Industrial psychology professor, Cal State Fullerton

Pay Cut Sparks Questions

Q: Can an employee be forced into taking a pay cut that would effectively eliminate payment for overtime hours worked?

If so, shouldn’t some written notice be required prior to enforcement of the rate reduction?

One day, the supervisor informed me of a new policy dealing with “inconvenience time.”

Prior to implementing the new policy, my regular hourly rate was $9.63 and overtime was $19.26 per hour. The new policy lowered the hourly rate to $8.10 and included one hour of “inconvenience time”--paid at $12.15 per hour--each work day. This hour of “inconvenience time” is to be paid whether or not the hour of overtime is actually worked.

This new policy effectively eliminates payment for one hour of overtime each day. I will now have to work up to 99 hours for the same pay I was receiving for an 88-hour pay period. This new policy amounts to an average loss of $225 per month.

Do I have grounds for legal action since this pay reduction was not based on performance? If so, is there an agency I should contact?

--F.M., Irvine

A: There is no law that prohibits decreasing an employee’s pay if it does not violate promises to the employee in the past or minimum-wage law.

However, if it can be shown that the pay reduction is simply a pretext to avoid paying overtime, then it might be illegal. An obvious example is when the pay cut applies only for a short period of time. If a retail business cuts your pay in the months before the busy time of Christmas and then restores it to old level in January, it would be illegal. In fact, the shorter the duration of the pay cut, the more provable your case would be.

It might be more difficult to prove that a permanent pay cut is illegal. The California Labor Commissioner’s office oversees wage and hour violations.

You might not be losing as much money as you think, however. Apparently, you were being paid overtime at twice your normal hourly rate. Employers are required to pay only 1 1/2 times the hourly rate for hours of work over eight hours a day or 40 hours a week.

Also, consider the advantages of receiving an hour of “inconvenience time” even if you do not work that extra hour. If your employer does not ask you to work too much overtime, you might end up making almost the same money per hour that you did before.

--Don D. Sessions, Employee rights attorney, Mission Viejo

Heirs Can Use Benefits to Settle Medical Bills

Q: My brother had a workers’ compensation case--he was injured on the job. He was in the process of negotiating a compromise on future medical benefits when he passed away. Do his heirs have a right to monetary compensation for future medical benefits even if he died?

--K.C., Cypress

A: Medical care is one of the benefits that can be awarded an injured worker in a hearing before the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. Once awarded, medical care is referred to as future medical care that has not yet been used.

When medical care is awarded, the employer or its workers’ compensation insurance carrier has the responsibility to pay for medical care needs as they arise. Such care may include transportation as well as hospital benefits, physicians’ care, therapy, prescriptions or anything else the physician believes is required “to cure or relieve from the effects of the injury.”

It is not uncommon for an employer or insurance carrier to negotiate a settlement based on the value of future medical care after it has been awarded. But when an injured worker dies, the future benefits no longer have any value since the deceased no longer receives medical care.

However, any accrued medical expenses that have not been reimbursed at the time of an employee’s death--as well as any accrued unpaid temporary disability, permanent disability or rehabilitation benefits--may be collected by dependents or heirs of the deceased worker.

If the death was caused by the injury and fewer than 240 weeks have passed since the date of the injury, the dependents may be entitled to death benefits. Heirs are not necessarily dependents.

There is also a burial expense that is payable if the death resulted from the injury and occurred less than 240 weeks after the date of injury.

--Eugene Leviton, Workers’ compensation attorney, Santa Ana