The making of a supervisor referral is frequently recorded in official performance improvement plans and corrective letters. If disclosed by the employee, why should a record of EAP participation not be officially recorded?

EAP utilization would be adversely affected if employee participation in the EAP were routinely recorded in a personnel document after a supervisor referral. This would diminish the value of the EAP to the work organization. When an employee is referred to the EAP, the referring manager or supervisor is using the EAP as a helping resource and constructive management tool to assist the employee in improving performance.  Documenting the making of a supervisor referral is a good idea to record the offer of help; however this does not violate the employee’s confidentiality. Some employees with severe performance problems may have their EAP attendance documented if they have accepted participation in the EAP as part of an agreement to have an adverse action held in abeyance. This is always done with a signed release.  Beyond this exception, no practical purpose exists to record an employee’s participation in an EAP.

If supervisors are not supposed to diagnose alcohol or drug-addicted employees, why are signs and symptoms of an employee with a possible alcohol or other drug problem, like alcohol on the breath, included in supervisor training?

Supervisors are provided with common performance-related signs and symptoms that could be associated with many personal problems. The more comprehensive the list of performance problems, the better.  Clinical symptoms that professionals use to diagnose chemical dependency are not provided to supervisors. Some performance symptoms may be more common among employees with alcohol or other drug problems, but are not diagnostic. Alcohol on the breath may be a performance issue upon which to base a supervisor referral, but it alone has little diagnostic value. Training supervisors helps them avoid natural inclinations to focus on images, myths, or stereotypes of addicted persons. When this shift is made to focusing on performance problems, more employees who have alcohol or other drug dependencies get referred.

My employee and I differ on how he should be doing his job. We’ve known each other a long time, but recently seem to be in continual conflict.  Would it be a good idea to have the EAP mediate our conflict with each other?

You should examine the nature of your conflict with your employee before engaging in a mediation process. Some supervisors feel hesitant about asserting themselves with employees they know well because it feels awkward and antagonistic to their long-term and familiar relationship.  They would like to avoid feeling as though they are “pulling rank.”  They are unaware that their employee’s behavior has placed them in this position, so they struggle with a way to get the job done without upsetting their employee. You have a right to expect work duties to be performed in ways you judge effective. Although mediation is useful in workplace relationships, the natural imbalance of power between the supervisor and the employee can be harmed by mediation. This could send a message that makes changes optional for the supervised employee. Work with the EAP to understand your role, this relationship, and the most appropriate options for resolving conflict. You may decide that mediation is not appropriate.  

Not all employees will perform satisfactorily after referral to the EAP. Some reject EAP recommendations outright, some bounce back 100 percent, and others try but fail to manage a personal problem successfully. All employees, however, must own their outcome of working with the EAP and the quality of their performance. You may be frustrated by the irregular work pace your employee displays, where months of satisfactory performance separate performance problems. If you do not act in the best interest of the organization, you will enable your employee to avoid feeling accountable for satisfactory performance. The pattern you describe will therefore continue.   Your employee is not performing in a satisfactory manner, so you must decide what to do about it. Be careful not to see the EAP as a safe harbor for your employee or as responsible for the quality of his performance.

Our work division is plagued by rumors. It’s been this way for years.  What makes rumors worse among some organizations than others?  What can managers do to reduce their occurrence?

Rumors are unsubstantiated information of uncertain origin spread usually by word of mouth. Frequent rumors give you a clue that there is a need to improve communication within the workplace or tackle problems that affect morale. Problems in each of these areas usually feed the development of rumors. Communication flows more slowly, but accurately downward through management levels, but more rapidly and inaccurately in a horizontal direction. Very large groups of employees with the same pay grade, rank, or status who report to one leader or management team (a flat organization structure) may experience more problems with rumors. Communicate with employees in a flat organization more frequently, particularly at stressful times, and you will intervene in the rumor mill more effectively.  Increase morale by identifying needs of employees, finding ways for them to control and influence their work, and applying policies and work rules fairly and consistently.