Hmmm, slightly difficult situation here...

[CorpSec]

Your company should have a Human Resources department or a person that is assigned that function. They should take the lead in this and you should follow their directions.

As a supervisor, that is exactly what I would do. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned is what they say. This woman could be lying and you must be careful not to take adverse action against his employment for possibly unfounded statements.

Are there policies explicitly outlawing this type of behavior? She doesn't say that any of it wasn't consensual.

When I did patrol for a previous company, it wasn't uncommon for guys to bring their girlfriends out with them from time to time. It wasn't authorized and could have certainly gone south in a hurry if there was an accident or incident. But, I don't think anyone thought a supervisor would do anything more than tell then tell them to knock it off.

[Maelstrom]

While you may know what 10-44 and 10-45 means but the rest of us are left guessing. Follow the lead of Fire and Police agencies and drop the 10 codes.

10-4!


I haven't heard 10 codes used since the days of early CB radio

[HotelSecurity]

10-4!


I haven't heard 10 codes used since the days of early CB radio

Montreal Police, Fire Department & the Provincially run Ambulance service still use 10-codes. It actually helped me when I was younger & dud not understand French as well as I do now. I knew how to count in French! All communications by the Fire Department & Ambulance are in French. 2 English speaking police officers might speak English to each other but all calls are given in French. What is worst is that all 3 10-codes are different! The police also use other number codes eg 001=Murder, 006 = Attempted murder, 638 = fight +++

[flashlightcop509]

OK, first of all, "Team Leader" at my site pretty much means that Myself and one other Officer have been at that particular post the longest... It is not meant as a "supervisory" title per se, so any disciplinary action to be taken regarding this Officer will be coming from the corporate office; That kind of decision is not within my authority to make. And perhaps I should have worded my initial post a little better, I was trying to get a general concensus of what others would consider an appropriate action to take, I didn't intend it to come across as an "Omigod, what do I do?" kind of statement...

Anyway, the Officer that initially interviewed the female involved has contacted our company's 2nd in charge, and relayed the information to him; The female did state that if necessary, she would speak with said number 2 boss directly and let him know exactly what was what. I just figured that it would have made things more difficult without a written statement from the female...

LOL: signed affidavit... notarized... 3 witness signatures. Get off your high horse.

OK, show me exactly where in my first post I said anything other than a "signed statement"... No mention of notary, no 3 witness signatures, and I ain't on no high horse...

If someone at your site has a complaint or an issue that needs to be followed up on, don't you think it would be beneficial to have it in writing and signed by the complaintant?

[Christopherstjo]

Anyway, the Officer that initially interviewed the female involved has contacted our company's 2nd in charge, and relayed the information to him; The female did state that if necessary, she would speak with said number 2 boss directly and let him know exactly what was what. I just figured that it would have made things more difficult without a written statement from the female...

That's cool and all that but like I said: Based on your initial post, she was fine with things all up to the point that she found out the Officer was cheating on her with another lady friend. Sounds more like she wants revenge rather than genuinely feeling sexually harassed.

[ValleyOne]

OK, show me exactly where in my first post I said anything other than a "signed statement"... No mention of notary, no 3 witness signatures, and I ain't on no high horse...

Actually, I think that was a shot at another member who stated his company's policy regarding complaint filed against one of their own...

At least that's how I took it to be....

[SecTrainer]

Predictably, we all seem to be like the six blind men describing an elephant here...lots of different notions, each of which is faulty because of our perspective is limited.

Workplace misconduct is a road littered with landmines and IEDs so it's very difficult, if not impossible, to say "what should be done" about any given situation without a full objective assessment of the facts.

One thing is certain: It doesn't matter, really, what anyone's motives "might be" for raising a complaint...no substantive complaint can be dismissed out of hand on the basis of such speculations. The fact that a complaint is motivated by elements of anger, self-interest, jealousy, etc., does not mean the complaint is not true, and it doesn't change anything about how the complaint is handled. It would only inform you, should it prove to be false, as to why they filed a false complaint. You can't assume it's false "up front" because the motives aren't "pure". Rarely, in fact, are they ever "pure"...there is usually some element of personal dislike or other self-interest behind most complaints, whether external or internal. Complaints against the police, for instance, are often raised by people who have been arrested or otherwise subjected to some police action. The complainant is angry about that. So what? You still have to deal with what they're saying about how the police conducted themselves.

Complaints must be subjected to an established, appropriate process for fact-finding and proper disposition and the process, from start to finish, must be properly documented. And, it's erroroneous to think of this process as "hoops we have to jump through". Properly crafted, the process is what reveals the facts of the incident and distinguishes these from rumors, gossip and unproven allegations. If the complaint is unfounded, the process will reveal this.

As such, the process actually facilitates, rather than hinders, appropriate disposition of the complaint. If it does not permit "knee-jerk" reactions such as some of those I've read here, so much for the better. Knee-jerk reactions will land your company in legal hot water (did I say "hot water"? I meant "boiling oil") 9 times out of 10.