Weighing Terminology – When Fair Isn’t Fair

In 1963, John Stacey Adams published his theory on equity (referred to as Adams’ Equity Theory). It is a simple theory that explains the thought process by which employees determine the fairness of management decision-making. Fundamentally, it states that employees compare their treatment to that of others in the workplace to determine whether it is “fair” or equitable.

If you’ve worked in HR or management for more than a nano-second, you’ve likely had the employee, whom you’ve just written up for their umpteenth issue, state that your actions are not “fair,” and they often point to other employees whom they believe acted in the same manner but were not held accountable in the same way. But the reality is that fair treatment is not always the same treatment.

As a simple example, let’s compare two employees who are both experiencing attendance issues. Charles has been with the company for ten years and has missed only one or two days of work per year. However, in the last two months, Charles has missed seven days of work. Darlene is a new employee, hired about two months ago, and she, too, has missed seven days of work. One might argue that they should both be treated the same. But should they?

While it might be appropriate to provide them both with the same type of counseling, I argue that Charles, given his strong attendance history, might be afforded a bit more grace. Certainly, the change in behavior should prompt a manager or HR to ask whether something is going on in his life that has caused this change in behavior. Based on the answer, is a leave of absence or some other intervention indicated? Darlene, as a newer employee without a solid attendance history, may not be offered the same grace (unless, of course, she indicates that her absences are due to a need for accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act).

Of course, the onus of explaining the “inputs” into the related decision process to Darlene falls on HR or management. A conversation explaining that “fair” and “the same” are very different may be in order. The concept of “fair” (often referred to as equitable) takes into account various factors (such as history and length of service, as in the example).

When HR develops policies, these types of nuances should be kept in mind. Creating a rigid policy that does not allow for management discretion will likely not provide the flexibility needed to manage employees fairly. This is why you often see policies that include statements related to factors that may be included in the decision-making process, including references to length of employment, history, business necessity, etc. It is best practice to document not only the factors that led to any decision related to employment, but also to consider including them in any disciplinary action taken against the employee.

After all, fair is fair!