UMGC Probation Notice Due to Persistent Tardiness Memorandum

The Scenario

RC, a communications professor at the University of Bristol, was a long-time member of the

Bristol Health Club (BHC) where he liked to start his day with a brisk swim. Because of his busy

teaching schedule, he was always the first into the water when the pool opened each morning.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the pool was closed from March 2019 through January 2020.

The pool finally reopened in February 2021, but the start of the morning swim session was

pushed back 30 minutes to 8:00 a.m. instead of its original 7:30 a.m. With a later open, RC’s

morning schedule was even tighter. With a limited amount of time to exercise, he relied on the

pool’s posted swim schedule to plan his day.

For years both before and after the COVID shutdown there had been a problem at the BHC

pool: a frequently late lifeguard (LL). When LL finally arrived at the pool 15 minutes late one

morning in January 2023, RC came to his breaking point and decided he had to act.

RC’s Perspective

After an abbreviated workout, during which he could think about nothing but the LL situation,

RC sent the following email to LL’s supervisor:

To: Supervisor

Date: January 26, 2023, 9:45 a.m.

From: RC

Subject: Lifeguard LATE – AGAIN

Supervisor,

I am long-time member of the Bristol Health Club, and a frequent swimmer at the BHC

pool. I am writing to alert you to the behavior of LL, the lifeguard on duty this morning.

Despite the fact that the start of the morning session was pushed back 30 minutes after

the COVID shutdown, LL STILL DID NOT OPEN THE POOL ON TIME THIS

MORNING. This is not one-time behavior

–

it has been an issue for years. In fact, I was

there the morning he kept the mayor waiting for nearly 30 minutes. At that time, I told

LL that he needed to be more respectful of others’ time.

When LL finally arrived this morning, I told him that he couldn’t keep opening the pool

late. That he was stealing my time. His response was, “My supervisor knows.” His

response is troubling because (1) He doesn’t show any concern for his impact on others,

and (2) He seems to be suggesting that either this is acceptable behavior, or as his

supervisor you are prevented from doing anything about it.

It’s almost two years since the pool re-

opened after the COVID shutdown. You’re not

doing him (or BHC members) any favors by condoning his delinquency

–

in fact, you are

damaging BHC’s reputation for excellence. As a result, if you cannot address LL’s

behavior so that he knows tardiness is not acceptable, then I will be forced to post a

negative review on multiple social media platforms for everyone to see.

Best regards,

RC

The Supervisor’s Perspective

The BHC supervisor had been dealing with LL’s tardiness for yea

rs. Despite the serious health

crisis, she was relieved that she didn’t have to deal with his tardiness when the pool was closed

due to COVID-19, and then thought the problem would be solved when she pushed back the start

time by 30 minutes to 8:00 a.m. LL had never been more than 30 minutes late before, so if he

would have just followed his past behavior, then he never would have been late again. To her

disappointment, LL persisted in his “delinquency.” Although his tardiness was sporadic, over the

years it had generated verbal complaints from several members. Unfortunately, neither her verbal

reprimands nor positive encouragement had improved LL’s behavior.

Because of liability issues, a certified lifeguard was required to be in the pool area whenever

swimmers were present. As a result, no other staff member could open the pool if a lifeguard was

late. In an ideal situation, she would staff the pool with two lifeguards during every shift,

providing backup in case one lifeguard was late or sick. But the current situation was far from

ideal: even two years after the COVID shutdown, she was still short-staffed throughout the club

and had found it especially difficult to hire new lifeguards. College students from the nearby

university were a possibility, but the

y typically didn’t want morning shifts. Although he wasn’t

reliable, LL was willing to take any shifts he could get.

Given LL’s history, it wasn’t surprising when the supervisor sat down at her computer one

morning in January to read the email from RC. “I can’t let this go on,” she thought. “But I don’t

have many options. I can’t fire him because then I won’t have anyone to open.” After reflection,

she concluded, “I assume opening late is better than not opening at all.”

Based on a recommendation from BHC’s HR department, she decided to “write up” LL for

tardiness and place him on probation for three months. Probation meant that LL would be fired if

there were any more incidents during the probation period. The supervisor hoped that this action

would get LL’

s attention and give her time to hire more lifeguards so that two lifeguards were on

the schedule every morning.

She still had to respond to RC’s email. She wanted to validate his concerns and tell him that the

LL situation was being handled. She knew that

she couldn’t make excuses and couldn’t reveal

sensitive personnel information, but she did want RC to understand the situation and some of the

constraints she was working under. It was important that she maintain a positive relationship

with RC and de-escalate the situation. Most importantly, she needed RC to not post anything

negative about the club until she had a chance to act.

The Writing Task

You are the supervisor.

1.

Write a memo to LL

to document the situation. Inform him of his new probationary status

and encourage him to improve his behavior. You are limited to 250 words.

2.

Respond to RC’s email

using the facts provided in the case. You are limited to 250 words.

In the response to RC, please use this heading:

To: RC

From: Supervisor

RE: Lifeguard LATE