| |
About the Presenters
Liz Danielian, MSW, LCSW, CEAP is an EAP Workplace Consultant with Valueoptions, providing consultation and support to client companies regarding employee performance issues, workplace incidents, and trainings. She also provides clinical case management to employees referred to the EAP by their company. She has worked in the field of Employee Assistance since 2004. Liz has over 12 years of experience supporting individuals, families and organizations. Her professional background includes work in child welfare and adoption, developmental disabilities, mental health, and substance abuse. She earned her undergraduate degree from Northwestern University and her Master’s in Social Work from The University of Illinois at Chicago, Jane Adams College of Social Work.
Rachel Kaufmann, MA, LPC, CEAP has 15 years of counseling experience in diverse settings including higher education, private practice, military, and a county mental health crisis line. Currently Rachel works as an EAP Workplace Consultant for ValueOptions where she provides EAP consultation, training and complex case management for over 100 client companies. Rachel received a bachelor’s degree in Biology and Psychology from Scripps College and holds a Master’s degree in Counseling from Webster University.
About the Program
Learning Objectives:
- Situational Awareness
- Identify 20 Ways a Management Referral Can Go Wrong & How to Avoid Them
- Methods to Shape Expectations from the First Call
- Reframing When Necessary
- A Palette of Successful Interventions
Q & A
can the presenters speak to the cases where the company is not really trying help the cl. but wants the cl. to be fired and is only referring to EAP because Legal or HR is requiring it, they are hoping the employee will not get help or get better because the relationship with the boss is so poor?
This is a difficult scenario for sure, and we do face it regularly. When consulting with HR, it's important to coach them about our best practices . I flush out the idea that although they may be doing this to satisfy legal/hr etc. , that we will approach the case in the spirit of EAP. Then, I typically talk about how to frame the referral to the employee. We hit hard on the idea that the HR/Manager need s to be extremely clear with the employee about the purpose and consequences of complying with the request or not. For example, if there is an ongoing investigation and the employee is at risk of/likely to be terminated, but also being sent to EAP, that they tell the employee this is to support them and give them an opportunity to get help but it is separate from the ongoing investigation and the disciplinary decisions are not yet determined. Or, if it is indeed a condition of continued employment that they need to know that also. Particularly in Threat of violence cases, if the employee feels misled about the scope/purpose of eap referral, then they are terminated the possibility of it escalating to violence or retaliation goes up.
With the employee, we are careful to clarify our role vs. HR/Manager role/decisions. Sometimes when the possibility of job loss is a little more out in the open, I will talk to the employee about how EAP can be helpful to help them cope with their feelings/frustrations, future planning, and to address the behaviors that resulted in the disciplinary problem...since they will need to find new employment and this can be a meaningful way to learn lessons so that history doesn't repeat itself. All the while, careful to talk hypothetically and make sure the employee understands that the EAP's role is separate from the employment decisions.
With the affiliate, I typically do not want to put them in the uncomfortable spot of knowing someone it to be terminated but not being able to talk about it because the employee doesn't yet know. This does not bode well for therapeutic rapport. So, I give them a clear idea of the situation, the seriousness of the possible employment outcomes, that the eap services are not a condition of employment but separate from the investigation. In that way, the affiliate can be sure not to inadvertently mislead the employee into thinking that EAP is going to save their job. Or, if it is comply and you stay don't and you go, I let the affiliate know that too.
If employee does not know why he/she is being (mandatorily )referred, how should EAP handle this ?
This is also a frequent occurrence. When consulting with HR in anticipation of the referral, I ask explicitly about the conversation they had with the employee, the employee's response, and the HR's impressions about the employee's understanding of why they have been referred. I also ask HR if they are okay with me recounting some of our conversation about the reasons for referral so that if I need to confront an employee with the HR's account of their conversation I can. When I get the opportunity to talk to an HR before they make the referral we talk about the importance of them making the reasons for referral explicit. And, when those things are done, if the employee is still saying they don't' know why, sometimes I'll do a 3 way call to the HR (sometimes just suggesting this gets the employee to come clean that they do indeed know why they are being referred) I'll say to the employee "well, maybe we should call and discuss this with your HR if you aren't sure why they have referred you." Or, if I've confronted them with what the HR said was discussed, I'll then tell them if they disagree or they don't think that's right, I direct them to go back to HR and discuss it further. Then, I call HR and give them an head's up that the employee will be coming to them at my suggestion and coach them on how to handle this. I also offer for them to make the conference call with the employee back to me if needed.
Training Materials
Thank you for attending HPS University! |
|
