I used to have enormous respect for Malini Johnson. Others, who had been in the company longer than I, had different views (citing past events) but I can only judge on my own experiences. Understandably, there were often times when issues involving staff had to be addressed, sometimes with potentially serious consequences, but I always found Malini to be fair, thorough and willing, as well as able, to see situations from all angles. As an example, these attributes were clearly demonstrated during 2009 when we had to make some EG-IT staff redundant. This was clearly a difficult time but I felt that HR supported, guided and managed us (local management) very effectively, alongside providing appropriate support to those individuals affected.
Of course, in the past Malini was well supported by strong HR Managers. EG-IT enjoyed the services of two individuals (both sadly left the company), who were highly competent, professional and always willing to stand up for what was right. Neither had any difficulty in challenging Patrick Naef when necessary - a rare attribute!
But I never felt that the excellent overall HR support we had received was solely due to the HR Manager at the time. To me, Malini was very much part of the equation and was visibly involved when necessary. She was well informed about issues in EG-IT and was clearly worried at times about Patrick Naef’s behaviour. During one particularly difficult period, Malini was very proactive in terms of gathering information from various individuals. And, right up until last year, she would regularly ask me how Patrick had been ‘behaving lately’ and although the tone was always light, even humorous, it reflected a genuine concern she had about the impact Patrick Naef had on individuals.
So what changed? During the meeting when Patrick dropped his sudden “I have to move you out of your job” bombshell (despite, just nine weeks earlier, telling me he “really valued and enjoyed working with” me) Malini was strangely supportive of Patrick and provided no assistance to me at all. At the time I just put this down to the usual impact that Patrick Naef’s overpowering personality has on people in meetings. I felt sure that the ‘real Malini’ would re-emerge. But I was wrong.
Malini Johnson was quite happy to sign my termination letter knowing that it contained nothing but false allegations, all of which are demonstrably not true. She was quite happy to deliver that letter knowing that it was an instrument to bundle me out of the organisation without any form of hearing at all, let alone a fair one. Such action is totally at odds with what anyone, in any company, in any part of the world, would expect of an HR professional.
At my ‘termination meeting’ I questioned how I could be in such a position when Patrick Naef had very recently assessed me in box 6 (high performance, high potential). Patrick denied that he had done this. I then produced irrefutable evidence to support my statement - a document, in Patrick Naef’s own handwriting, clearly showing box 6. Patrick Naef, having been caught out, squirmed and try to wriggle out if it. He said he had placed me in box 5. Putting aside the fact that the majority of our strong staff (the core of the organisation) are in box 5, none of whom would be deemed anywhere near having ‘performance issues’, let alone being fired, Malini had witnessed Patrick Naef not telling the truth. Yet she did nothing.
Malini also broke an important promise she made to me. I was certain that, once I was out of his way, Patrick Naef would target certain areas and individuals he had in his sights. I was very concerned that Patrick would be taking action against individuals without constraint, without anyone providing some balance. With a recent change of HR Manager and me gone, all continuity was going to be lost. So I asked Malini if she would set up a session where I could brief her and Sophia Panayiotou about all the issues in EG-IT which Patrick had misunderstood, details of individuals’ strengths and weaknesses as I saw them and suggestions of senior managers in the business who they could consult for more balanced views on individuals if necessary. Malini indicated to me that she recognised the need and value of such a session and promised me (three times) that she would set it up. But she failed to do so.
Worst of all, I went to see Malini (just before I was terminated) in her office to try and get some personal support from her. She refused to talk to me, pleading with me not to involve her. Such (in)action goes beyond the description of being unprofessional, I would describe it as a total dereliction of duty. Even people as senior and experienced as me sometimes need some support and, as an employee of the company, I had a right to expect such support. For some reason, Malini had other views.
At the time I could only conclude that Malini had been bullied into such a change of approach. I could not see this as an excuse as, at her level and salary, she should be capable of standing her ground, but, having seen the impact Patrick Naef had had on many others over the years, I could at least understand. But later, the President, Gary Chapman, confirmed to me that the action to terminate my contract “had the full support of everyone in HR”. Without doubt, that would have included Malini Johnson so it is clear that she was happy to have me sacked, despite knowing that not a shred of evidence had ever been presented to support even alleged disciplinary action, let alone anything more serious. I do not know if Malini is a member of any formal HR Institution but, if she is, her role in my dismissal would surely preclude her continued membership if they were to be made aware of it.
I would love to know what caused Malini Johnson to perform such an enormous U-turn on me. The problem is, she has refused to communicate with me on the subject. I just hope that one day she will. It would be an interesting conversation.
