Failing to properly follow the process rules and yet refusing to admit it

Haha, let him explain himself about what he’s doing. If he doesn’t do that, then find other ways to punish him, under different pretexts. In short, make him suffer a little so that he knows who’s in charge. When dealing with such scoundrels, use scoundrel tactics. What to do depends on one’s skills; there are various management models. The key is flexibility.

With all the factual evidence available, still ask him/her whether to admit it before imposing a penalty directly.

What’s the use of him being a deadbeat if the evidence is solid? Impose the necessary penalties in accordance with regulations to serve as a warning. Don’t court judgments also state that there are no confessions?

Evidence! With irrefutable evidence, how can he still deny it?

As long as adverse consequences occur and it is determined through analysis that human factors are at fault, penalties must be imposed in accordance with the regulations.

It seems that what the original poster said, namely that “all evidence proves he caused the accident,” is a bit far-fetched; otherwise, the poster wouldn’t have said such a thing. Since it’s already confirmed, is his acknowledgment still needed?

In such a situation, just follow the rules – impose whatever punishment is appropriate. Tell him clearly that there are ghosts who died in agony in every temple; moreover, he isn’t being wronged, so let him **go**.

In dealing with process accidents, personal and physical evidence are also important, along with an analysis of the circumstances. If an employee has legitimate grievances, they should be heard; decisions should not be made lightly. 1. Understand the employee’s usual work attitude and manner of interacting with others, that is, their level of popularity among colleagues； 2. What is the integrity of this employee? ； 3. The employee’s work skills ； 4. Consequences/Nature/Impact of the incident ； Companies need to strengthen management; sometimes they have to take action as a warning to others, and other times they need to be more humane. Mistakes and lack of responsibility are not the same thing

I agree with the views from floors 8 and 10. The owner’s evidence is all indirect; otherwise, they wouldn’t keep denying it! :In this situation, it’s very likely that many people in the workshop are shifting responsibility onto one another; the method suggested by the friend on the 10th floor is definitely worth learning from :)

If you say it violates process discipline, then you need to provide evidence; otherwise, others will surely not agree. What is evidence? First, look at the operation records; second, check the instrument readings. It’s even better if there are DCS records available. By examining these records, it can be determined whether the operations carried out indeed violated regulations (such as exceeding temperature, pressure, or other specified limits). If such violations do occur, then penalties should be imposed in accordance with the established rules. It’s important to note that these rules must be formulated in advance and made public before they can be effectively enforced, so that everyone will accept them. Otherwise, disputes are bound to arise. With such solid evidence, have him write down the details of the accident; in accordance with the principle of not letting any accident go unaddressed, and on the basis of providing him with education, a direct penalty can be imposed in line with the established procedures.

It’s necessary to listen to the employees’ opinions; adopting an all-or-nothing attitude like the one shown by the original poster is not conducive to the progress of future work

Handling accidents also requires considering various situations: it is necessary to take into account the intentions behind the employee’s actions at the time, as otherwise the outcome of such handling could affect the motivation of other employees in the future. It creates a situation where no work is done, and everything remains peaceful ； When doing things, they might like to punish.

Previously, this employee had burned down a motor and refused to admit it; the manager had no choice but to make the four teams share the cost. Yet after the incident, he actually claimed in private to his own team members that he was the one who caused the motor to burn down. Other employees are unwilling to argue with him or deal with him.

Hehe, the owner has run into a real pain in the neck – it’s indeed tough to deal with:P

Find a way to get rid of him, even fire him; who knows what problems might arise in the future. Such people in artificial intelligence companies must not be allowed to continue their misdeeds unchecked.

I’ve encountered the same situation you described. The approach to dealing with it depends on the rules in your factory. In my factory, we handled it as follows: An employee caused the pump’s shaft to get stuck, but he refused to admit that it was his fault (he replaced the oil secretly after the incident in an attempt to cover up evidence). We asked him to write down what had happened. Based on what he wrote, I gathered technical staff and team members for a meeting on-site, and they disassembled the pump and drained the oil; those familiar with the situation could immediately understand what had occurred. We then asked him to write another accident report. After spending a week on that, he was suspended for investigation, forced to admit his mistake in public, and was fined twice his usual bonus amount for one month; he was also placed on standby for half a year (with a living allowance provided). This was a punishment for intentional misconduct and refusal to admit fault.

Assuming the original poster is correct, first of all, they need to gather all the evidence for the investigation. Remember, when dealing with people like those you mentioned, it’s necessary to have conclusive and irrefutable evidence; otherwise, you will be at a disadvantage later on； Then, the relevant regulations must have been established and made public in advance; only then can penalties be effective as a deterrent and convincing to people. If the regulations are created after an accident occurs, they are not suitable for imposing penalties for such violations ； With these two provisions in place, punishment can be imposed in accordance with the regulations regardless of whether the person admits fault or not; moreover, if the person shows a poor attitude toward admitting their mistake, heavier penalties can be considered.