Molly works in the Information Department of a private firm and reports directly to Bobby, her
department head. Molly is a skilled and committed employee who has been with the organization for
nearly five years. She is known for her dedication and quality of work. However, over the past six
months, she has consistently struggled with punctuality, often arriving 15 to 30 minutes late to work
Bobby, her supervisor, has grown increasingly frustrated with the pattern. He has held multiple
conversations with Molly regarding her late arrivals. While Molly always apologizes and explains that her
delays are due to managing three young school-going children as a single parent. Bobby feels she is
failing to take responsibility and merely offering excuses.
Tension between them has escalated over time. Discussions meant to resolve the matter have often turned
heated and emotional, leaving both parties resentful. Their professional communication has deteriorated,
affecting their working relationship and the atmosphere within the team. Colleagues have begun to notice
the strained dynamics, which has impacted team morale.
Molly maintains that she is making genuine efforts to manage her home responsibilities better and has
requested flexible reporting hours or a slight adjustment in her shift timing to accommodate her situation.
Bobby, however, believes that allowing flexibility to one employee may set an undesirable precedent and
insists on adherence to uniform work policies.
In order to avoid further escalation and maintain professionalism, Molly and Bobby have agreed to
attempt mediation to address their issues constructively and seek a mutually acceptable resolution.
Core Issues for Mediation:
1. Workplace punctuality - determining whether reasonable accommodations can be made without
compromising department discipline.
2. Communication breakdown - restoring respectful and productive communication between Molly and
Bobby.
3. Work-life balance and employee support - evaluating the company's approach toward working
parents and flexible arrangements.
4. Impact on team dynamics - addressing how the conflict is affecting overall team morale and
functioning.
· A temporary flexible schedule on a trial basis (e.g., 9:30 AM start, with adjusted log-out
time).
· Daily output reporting to assure accountability.
· Periodic reviews to assess the arrangement’s effectiveness.
· Involving HR to document and formalize the accommodation for transparency and
fairness.
Possible Counter-Claims
1. “Rules are rules. If I give you flexibility, everyone will want it.”
“Bobby, I’m not asking for special treatment. I’m asking for a chance to meet my
responsibilities both as an employee and as a parent. Let this be a trial, not a precedent.
Judge me by my work, not my clock-in time.”
- confidential HR-supported arrangement with a defined review period and not a precedent
for others. HR could even include it under ‘exceptional caregiver accommodations’ if
needed.”
2. “Your lateness is affecting team morale.”
“I know the tension between us has affected the team, and for that, I’m sorry. That’s why I
want to rebuild trust—not just with you but with everyone who works alongside me. Let me
prove that my commitment to the team is unshaken.”
- propose that it remain discreet and handled through HR, not made visible to the team. My
intention is not to receive special treatment, but to quietly align work expectations with my
caregiving role
3. “You’ve already apologized too many times; words aren’t enough.”
“Then let my actions speak. Give me a chance to compensate—stay later, take fewer breaks,
whatever it takes. I’m not here to make excuses, I’m here to make it right.”
- It’s not due to lack of effort, but the unpredictability of managing three children alone.
Dcument this formally and align with workflow priorities
4. “If this continues, we might have to let you go.”
“Bobby, with respect, you’re my department head, not the final authority on my employment.
The law and company policy require fairness and due process. I stand ready to face
accountability, but I will not let five years of dedication be erased without my voice being
heard.”
-trial period of 2 to 3 months with a mid-term review, and if the situation hasn’t improved
by then, we can revisit other solutions. This avoids open-endedness and ensures mutual
accountability.
4. No Flexibility in Employment Terms
Bobby’s point: “Our contract doesn’t include flexible timings.”
“While the contract reflects fixed hours, I’ve seen the organization allow exceptions on a
need basis—for medical cases or employee well-being. I respectfully request similar
consideration in this context, not as a right, but as a reasonable, documented
accommodation. I’m happy to sign a side letter or undertake a trial adjustment with clear
conditions.”
6. Work Performance Doesn’t Excuse Policy Breach
Bobby’s point: “Even good performers must follow rules.”
“Absolutely. I am not using my work quality to excuse anything. Rather, I’m saying that I
have maintained performance despite personal strain, which shows my commitment. All
I’m asking for is a practical structure that allows me to meet both expectations without
chronic conflict.”
7. No End Date to Flexibility
Bobby’s point: “There’s no clarity on how long this arrangement would last.”
“I completely understand the need for clarity. I propose we set a trial period of 2 to 3
months with a mid-term review, and if the situation hasn’t improved by then, we can
revisit other solutions. This avoids open-endedness and ensures mutual accountability.”
8. Managerial Authority Being Undermined
Bobby’s point: “This is affecting my role and leadership.”
“I deeply regret that our conflict has caused strain. I respect your role and authority, and my
intention has never been to challenge it. I am only trying to find a humane middle ground
while remaining a productive part of the team. I would really appreciate the opportunity to
work together more cooperatively again.”
OPENING STATEMENT:
I extend my sincere thanks to the mediators for clearly outlining the procedure and facilitating today’s
session in an orderly manner. I would also like to acknowledge the opposite party for consenting to
mediation, recognising that litigation, being a more prolonged and adversarial process, could potentially
strain team dynamics further.
I appear today in an advisory capacity and do not hold decision-making authority on behalf of my client.
That said, as my client has already articulated her key concerns, I would now like to formally present and
clarify those issues to assist both the mediators and the opposite party in moving toward a constructive
and mutually acceptable resolution
1. Workplace punctuality
We acknowledge the importance of maintaining punctuality as a component of workplace discipline.
However, my client is not seeking a permanent exemption, but rather a structured and time-bound
accommodation. She is willing to compensate for delayed arrivals by extending her work hours,
adjusting break schedules, or undertaking a trial period to demonstrate that such flexibility would not
adversely impact productivity or departmental workflow.
2. Communication breakdown
My client acknowledges that prior conversations have, at times, become strained.To that end, she is open
to providing advance notice of any anticipated delays and periodic status updates, in order to rebuild
trust and improve day-to-day communication with her supervisor.
3. Work-life balance and employee support
While personal circumstances should not disrupt operational efficiency, it is equally important to
recognize the realities faced by employees with significant caregiving responsibilities. My client is not
requesting sympathy, but understanding. She continues to fulfil her professional responsibilities
diligently, despite the challenges of being a single parent to three children, one of whom requires
therapeutic care. A reasonable degree of flexibility would enable her to maintain both professional and
parental duties effectively.
4. Impact on team dynamics
It is acknowledged that visible tension between supervisor and employee may inadvertently impact team
dynamics. She is committed to working collaboratively with her supervisor to ensure that any
accommodations granted do not impair team morale, but instead set a positive example of conflict
resolution and mutual respect.
CLOSING STATEMENT:
Thank you to the mediators for guiding today’s session with fairness and patience. We truly appreciate the
balanced space created for both sides to be heard.
My client, Molly, has shown more willingness to cooperate and compromise here than she’s received in
return over the past several months. She has offered practical solutions and has made it clear she’s not
avoiding responsibility—but asking for understanding, not special treatment.
It is disheartening that this openness was repeatedly met with rigidity from someone entrusted with
departmental leadership. Leadership, after all, is not just about enforcing policies—it is about adapting
them when necessary, especially when doing so harms no one and supports those who continue to give
their best under difficult personal circumstances.
We hope this process encourages a shift from formality to fairness, and from authority to empathy.
LEGISLATIONS:
🔹 I. Labour Law Protections
1. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
● Section 2(oo): Dismissal without adhering to fair process qualifies as "retrenchment" and may be
challenged.
● Obligation of natural justice: Requires show-cause notice, opportunity to explain, and domestic
enquiry before termination.
● Late coming ≠ grave misconduct unless habitual and willful.
● Progressive discipline preferred: Warnings → Counseling → Last resort termination.
● Case Law: BHEL v. M. Chandrasekhar Reddy – Dismissal must be proportionate to misconduct.
2. Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946
● Defines employee duties and misconduct (e.g. habitual late-coming).
● Mandates that standing orders be communicated, reasonable, and consistently applied.
● Failure to follow standing orders before dismissal → unfair labour practice.
🔹 II. Gender and Family Responsibility Protections
3. Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 (and Amendments)
● Though primarily linked to maternity leave, the spirit of the Act supports continued protection
for working mothers beyond childbirth.
● Section 5(3): No discrimination due to maternity-related responsibilities.
● Terminating or penalizing due to caregiving burden may be seen as indirect discrimination.
● Supports request for flexible working arrangements where justified.
4. The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013 (POSH)
● Encourages creation of a safe, inclusive and supportive workplace for women.
● While not directly related to punctuality, the Act implies employer obligations toward
gender-sensitive workplace practices.
🔹 III. Constitutional and Anti-Discrimination Safeguards
5. Constitutional Provisions
● Article 14: Right to equality before law – arbitrary termination violates this.
● Article 15(3): State may make special provisions for women and children.
● Article 16: Equality of opportunity in public employment – extended by interpretation to private
workplace fairness.
● Article 21: Right to life and dignity – includes right to livelihood, not to be deprived without due
process.
🔹 IV. Practical and Policy-Based Considerations
6. Principle of Reasonable Accommodation
● Recognised in global labour standards (e.g. ILO).
● Increasingly accepted that employers must consider personal circumstances, especially for:
○ Single parents
○ Employees with dependents needing care
○ Genuine personal difficulties
● Flexible arrangements (adjusted shifts, remote work, make-up time) are seen as fair alternatives
to punitive action.
7. Impact on Employer
● Providing limited flexibility doesn’t necessarily harm productivity.
● Can improve:
○ Employee retention
○ Morale
○ Organisational reputation
● Refusing reasonable accommodations may result in:
○ Legal scrutiny
○ Employee disengagement
○ Increased attrition risk
● Termination for punctuality without exploring flexible options = disproportionate.
● Fair enquiry and documentation is legally required before any adverse action.
● Molly’s status as a single parent of three (with one child in therapy) is a valid reason to request
flexibility.
● Labour laws + Constitutional protections + evolving workplace standards = strong foundation to
contest harsh treatment.
● Emphasize that Molly:
○ Is willing to compensate hours
○ Maintains high work quality
○ Is not seeking exception, but a workable, time-bound accommodation.
● Litigation should be a last resort due to cost, time, and impact on team morale.
