Illegal Recordings, Valid Complaint: How HR Investigates Without Missing the Real Issue

Rebecca Taylor: This is HR Voices, a scenario-based podcast featuring real people leaders who deal with real people challenges every day. Each episode, we dig into the messy, gray area stuff nobody puts in a training deck. If this sounds like your kind of show, follow or subscribe wherever you're listening or watching, and leave us a rating. It helps other people leaders find us. HR Voices is brought to you by All Voices. Hello and welcome to HR Voices. I'm your host, Rebecca Taylor, and I'm here with Jeremy Edmonds, EVP of People and Culture at Snooze. Jeremy, thank you so much for coming. Thank you so much for having me. It's an honor and a pleasure to have been invited to your podcast. Yeah, I'm so glad that you're here because I know we had I think we had to reschedule this like three times or so because there's so much going on on all ends with summer and with all these things that are happening. So thank you for being here. I'm like so excited that we're able to talk about this scenario together now. Yeah, me too. I've been looking forward to it all morning. Same. And I love the scenario that you picked because I think it's very topical considering everything that's going on in the world right now. and even just the fact that, you know, we're talking about recording. So before I give any spoilers about what the whole scenario is, are you ready for me to read it out to you? I am ready. Okay. So we're calling this the employee who recorded everything. An employee under investigation for performance issues has been secretly recording every one-on-one with his manager for eight months in a two-party consent state where this is illegal without disclosure. He wants to submit the recordings as evidence that his manager has been setting him up to fail. HR has to weigh evidence that may be both illegally obtained and substantively true and figure out whether using it or refusing to creates more risk either way. Well, I feel like this is like one of those things where you're using like, I don't know, evidence in court that you're not supposed to use. It is. It it's it's one of these topics that I think is super relevant right now. I think people have so much access through technology, through their phones, to easily have the ability to do it. And I would say I'm seeing things like this pop up more often in the workforce than I would have ten years ago in my career. Yeah, yeah. And so as we look at the scenario as it's laid out, before we even dive into like all of the specifics, I guess kind of where does it stand out to you as the most risky or unclear, just as kind of a place for us to get started? Yeah, I think there's a couple of things that jump out when I hear this. The first one is depending on the state that you're in, do you have a an actual legal violation or a law violation because the recording was made in a two party consensus? And so the first thing that that kind of resonates with me is beyond the employee issue that's now being brought, is there an actual violation of law that's going to add a layer of risk to this that may not have been there if that wasn't a part of this investigation? And then I think, you know, the the second piece of risk to this is what what part of the recording or if you can use the recording or how do you think about this recording in context to the investigation you're going to you know, proceed with as a result of this. Yeah. Yeah, I guess do you even use it at all? If it's illegally obtained, can you even can you even listen to it or is it kind of one of those things where you have to say, well, we can't factor it in because it wasn't obtained legally? Yeah. You know, the answer to that I would give is maybe, but the first thing I would do is hit the pause button, call my lawyer and say, I'm in a really hairy situation. Let's, you know, get some guidance on how we can walk through this. y you know, I think the the core of this or the foundation of this is that there's two issues here and we need to separate them and think about them in that way. Issue number one is you have an employee who has brought to you a valid concern that it is now our obligation to look into. So recording or no recording, we need to be able to look at that objectively without bringing the recording into it. Then the secondary question is A, does the recording become a part of this? And B Now what do we have to do from an HR perspective to address the concern that the employee has created within themselves? Yeah. Yeah. It's true. It's just like there is sort of the issue at hand. And the issue at hand is that, you know, the the main sort of place where this starts is that an employee doesn't feel great about their relationship with their manager and that it's reflecting in their performance. And, you know, that's that could be true or not true depending on other evidence, right? There can be other evidence that you can use. That has nothing to do with the recording. I think one thing I wanna call out that I'm curious about is where is are these recordings stored? Like is this as like a personal voice note on their phone? Is it on the company laptop? Is it on a personal laptop? Like where is this stored? Because that could also, I don't know, if I hear that work conversations are being stored on non work devices, in a lot of s cases that's a compliance issue too. That I'd want to call a lawyer also. Depending on what type of organization you're with, that could violate HIPAA if you're within an organization that's regulated by HIPAA. Is is there a true compliance violation, whether at a federal, state, you know, local level or just from a company compliance? Yeah. Yeah. So as we start to peel back the layers of this onion, who do you start talking to or what do you start looking for as you're as you're sort of kicking off this investigation? Yeah, I would, you know, I would divide this into a couple of swim lanes. Swim and I my team would probably laugh at me right now if they heard me talking about swim lanes, but I with every HR issue that comes up, the first thing I think about is what are the lanes we need to operate in. And I think lane number one is the investigation into the employee. And, you know, in this situation you have a a very clear and evident complainant and you have a very clear and evident, you know, person who's being accused of the wrongdoing. So I would start by, you know, looking at the investigation in that way and through the course of, you know, interviewing that employee, understanding do they without the recording, taking that out of it, do they have witnesses or other examples of people that may have seen this behavior that they feel is unfair? it's coming up in one on ones, which is what they're indicating, but if this is truly happening, could they, you know, be able to indicate some witnesses that you would look at as well? So I would talk with the employee first and do a an initial fact finding to understand from them how, you know, what's happening, why is this happening, why do they think it's unfair, what are examples of it, you know, who may have been witness to it, and start piecing together the story. And then I would either wind up going to the manager or the witnesses, I think depending on the context that they're giving because oftentimes I want to have the most substance and context before I talk to that manager. So that way I can set the correct stage and know the right questions to ask. But if it's kind of gray or, you know, it's still not clear, I would, you know, dive in with the manager to to better understand what they're seeing, what they're experiencing with this employee and help them understand the concerns that are out there so that we can, you know, piece that together. And the second swim lane is then the bigger issue, which is Now we have somebody who acted in a way that is either a violation of company policy by doing the two ray recording, storing stuff on their computer they shouldn't, storing stuff on a third party device. And, you know, I think what I would get involved there would be some sort of outside counsel if there is a bigger concern to ensure that we are, you know, coaching that appropriately and documenting that and performance managing it in a way that protects the business and sets that not only us up for success, but that employment. Yeah. I love that your call one of your early calls is to legal. Cause I always say you're not always say, but I'm starting to always say and I'm starting to think a lot as we go through these a lot of these scenarios is like in a lot of these situations it's beneficial to loop in legal on the early side, especially when you're in a situation like this where there is possibly potentially something that can put the company at risk legally, right? But it's like there is a really good there can be a really good partnership between HR and legal in investigations, even if it's just, hey, this this is a thing, it may not lead to anything, but just flagging that this is what we're looking for and any, you know, anything that we should be aware of or to do or to not do would be helpful as we kind of go. Like that's a healthy partnership, I think. Yeah, I think it is as well. And oftentimes, you know, I I I would think about this in the context of what's your role in the organization. You know, if you're that HR manager one of the first people you're probably looping in is your senior HR leader so that they can be your partner on this. You're not running at this alone. You hopefully have somebody in your court that has that experience. If you're in a smaller company where you may be the only HR person and you're dealing with this, hopefully you have either that outside counsel resource or you're, you know, belong you belong to an association or a I think, you know, here locally we have a they just changed the name of it. but We have like a local organization that you know it's a hundred dollars a month, but you can get legal advice in that kind of immediacy. And I I think it's important to understand those resources before this comes up, so you're not running at it without having them in your court. And even if the question to them is, I don't know how dicey this is gonna get, but what advice do you have for me before I begin my investigation? Oftentimes I find that outside counsel is gonna say, Here's the two questions that I wanna know the answer to so that if it gets dicey, We're ahead of this verse chasing it in the it. Yeah. Yeah. I'm with you. And it that's kind of where the documentation part's gonna be really important too, because if it does get dicey and if it does turn out to be something that does eventually turn into a true sort of legal situation, your documentation about what you do along the way is what's gonna be set to court, right? That's what's gonna be evaluated. So it's like, you know. I think the I like how you separated into swim lanes because there are a couple different factors to kind of look at here and both are equally both are equally important and equally have to be dealt with. You can't sweep one under the rug, you know? Yeah, and I I documentation is key. I tell my team and every manager in my company, if it is not documented, it didn't happen. Yep. It may have happened in reality, but the reality is that when I go sit in court and I have to defend this, if we don't have date and timestamped documentation. that shows the journey that we've been on here, then it by legally is not substantive or substantive when we're sitting in the courtroom. Yep. Yeah. And so as you're looking at as so as you're starting, let's say, swim lane one, which is the investigation of the employee with the manager setting them up to fail. So, you know, we could have this recording. The recordings are kind of sitting in like this little like limbo out here, right? To kind of maybe they're evidence, maybe they're not. What other evidence are you looking at as you're going into this investigation? I know you mentioned having a discussion with the manager, some witnesses, but if it's a performance issue, there's gotta be other stuff you can look at, right? So where are you digging now? Yeah, one of the first things I would I would look at is, you know, you depending on the type of systems that you're using for performance management, for check-ins, for one-on-ones, what sort of documentation can you look at before you even, you know, talk with this employee? To understand the the greater scope of of what's happening. So if they're saying that they feel that they've been treated unfairly, let's look at their performance review. Let's look at any one-on-one notes that are available for the HR team to review. Let's look at those, you know, those those things that have already been documented to see what's happening in them. If you look at that documentation and it's all, you know, sunshines and rainbows from the manager, but this person still feels like they're being treated unfairly. That's a really interesting thing to have to dig into. If you look at that documentation and it's, you know, consistent coaching, it's, you know, you're starting to look at the language that's in there, it's gonna change the type of questions you're gonna ask that employee. So I think, you know, I don't go into any investigation or any fact finding without looking at the landscape first and kind of understanding what's happening. And then through that initial fact finding with the employee. It's then looking at the documents and the the systems that they're referring to to say, you know, one of the questions I would ask is, you know, where has this been documented? Have you seen this in, you know, what documents have you seen this in? And then now I'm gonna go review them or ask for them if there's something I don't have access to. Yeah, yeah. I'm with you because it's like they're the conversations, the one on one conversations are not the only way that performance is managed or that performance issues show up, right? So there theoretically should be some kind of written goal and performance against that goal in some sort of performance management system or even in something like, I don't know, Salesforce, if you're in a role like that, for example, right? Like our work doesn't just live in conversations with our managers. So there has to be other ways to to kind of get to it. And as you're finding some of the evidence, you know, I think something I'm looking at too is like if there's been a change. So it says that they've been secretly recording every one on one for eight months. So what happened eight months ago? that may have started this, that may or may not have started this, right? Did their performance start to start to tank and they wanted to sort of find a way to save themselves one day? I mean, I don't know. I'm speculating because, you know, I've seen a lot in my own time in HR, right? You're asking the right question though. You know, when you are doing that initial intake with that employee, one of the first questions I would ask is what changed eight month ago month eight months ago that prompted you to start recording? And you're probably gonna get a high level answer. And so I would twilet bowl it a little bit. Great, you gave me the high level. Now let's dig a little bit deeper and a little bit deeper and a little bit deeper, you know, deeper until we get to the core of something happened that made you start hitting that button. So let's understand that so that I can be, you know, the the best support and getting to the root cause behind them. Mm-hmm. Yeah. 'Cause sometimes you can find I mean, not to speculate. Well, I guess I could speculate, it's a fake scenario, right? So they're not real people. So we can speculate as much as we want. But I don't know how many times I've been in situations where a performance issue turns out to be something that if that could have been an accommodation issue, not issue, but it could have been an accommodation that you made eight, nine months ago that maybe that fell under the radar. Maybe the employee didn't know to ask for it. Maybe the manager didn't know how to kick off that conversation. And so now it's a performance issue that could potentially show, you know, illegal recordings, but maybe eight or nine months ago that showed up as the employee saying Hey, I can't take meetings before ten AM because I've got something going on where I can't do it. Right. It's like one thing is usually a symptom of so many other pieces because as human beings, we are more than just one performance report, one attendance report, et cetera. and that's where I would start to try to dig into all that too. Like what are attendance issues? What else have they been seeing? What what is the actual problem here? It's interesting because I I would say I frequently discover that a manager will reach out. So slightly different than this, but a manager reaches out and says, I'm having performance issues with this person on my team. And I ask, How long has it been happening? You know, they give a time frame and you go back and look through the documentation and either nothing exists because they haven't been documenting it. It's all been verbal coachings, or, you know, what they're claiming is I I I set clear expectations and they're not hearing me. Or you go look at their performance review and it's all sunshine and roses, and you have to ask, why wasn't this addressed in this very, you know, clear way in a tool that we've given you to address something such as Yeah, yeah. And I think like the part that I think the part that I'm stuck on with this is like that their person that this person is saying that there's evidence that their manager's been setting them up to fail. So I I know a lot of the challenges in in employee relations is sometimes that employees use different language for their issues because it's more just like this is how I'm experiencing it. And I think it's our job as HR to kind of be curious and get to like, Well, what do you mean by that? What do you mean by that? What do you mean by that? So, you know, have you ever and this is a broad question, you don't have to actually answer even it directly, but like even hypothetically, have you ever been in a situation where a manager wakes up and says, I'm gonna make my employees fail today? Like that's their agenda item. No, I I have it I've been in HR now for twenty five years and I have never been in a situation where a manager is intentionally out to set someone up to fail. Typically what I find is as you start digging into it, there's a miscommunication in there. There's a unclear expectations are being set. The manager's intentions, they believe they are communicating clearly, they believe they're setting strong goals, they believe they've you know, to find the role in the correct way. And then you dig in and you find out that they haven't. But that's not because they're intentionally saying, I want this person to fail. It's because they just don't have the skills or the tools or the resources to know how to clearly communicate. Now, maybe there are some managers out there that have a vendetta out against someone and are doing it. Yeah, we'll see them in my career I've not found that. Yeah. I'll say there's probably like maybe one or two percent that has it out for someone and they're oil and water and that's a a whole thing. But it's it's a lot more rare than I think, you know, some folks will make you think. And it's you know, it's interesting. Yeah, it is rare and and oftentimes in those cases you can unearth that very quickly by you know, by the questions of the manager and you can just tell that they don't you know, one of the things that I'll always ask is, you know How are you showing this employee that you care about their development? How are you showing this employee that you care? And if they can't articulate that, it is oil and water. And then let's address that issue, which is the two of you aren't on the same page. So that's a whole different performance issue than the employee feeling like they're being set up. Yeah. And this is where HR can really do well with performance issues. Exactly what you're saying is like, hey, it looks like there's some kind of communication challenge, some kind of mismet expectations. Manager says they're doing everything right, they're communicating everything properly, employee says otherwise. Both are probably correct, or at least they're correct in their in their narrative, right? And so this is where HR can really kind of come in and say, Hey, let's figure this out. Like my job is to help you all understand how to communicate better and work through this. And so that this incident isn't just a one it's just sort of a one-time thing that we then progressively get better and we fix it and we figure out what's going on. Cause it's usually just You know, like you've been saying, it's it's usually just a communication challenge that is it takes a little bit of different maybe ways of communicating to people to fix them. It's just, you know, it's peeling back that onion and getting to the core of what the actual problem is. I think it's you know, it's really easy for an employee to look at a situation and make the the gross assumption that I'm being harassed, I'm being retaliated against, I'm being you know, mistreated. And those are all the the right words to be asking or saying. But when you start to peel back, it's not actually harassment. It's a communication issue. It's not retaliation. It's a series of events that happened in an order that may have felt that way. But there's not a true, you know, there's not the true you did this and I'm retaliating against it. You know, explanation that would come with it. Yeah. Yeah. And a lot of those, you know, things that you mentioned, harassment, retaliation, they have very specific legal definitions to them. That's like and you know, that's kind of where it's a different is I think some folks will find that they'll they'll consider something harassment, but it's not the legal definition of it. And that's also part of our role in HR is translating those words, right? It's just like, you know, there there's very specific ways that this applies. And but at the root of it, You're showing that there's something that's not working, and let's figure out sort of what that is and how to get to the dep to the best ideal situation. So we still have these recordings that are kind of floating around in the area, right? So you've reviewed the performance reviews, you've looked back to see if anything's changed over the last eight months, you've spoken to witnesses, you've spoken to the manager. Let's say you haven't found much. Let's say you haven't found much to explain this dip in performance that. this that this employee has been experiencing. Like they're not being assigned terrible territories. They're not, you know, given the worst schedule that, you know, no customers come in, right? So none of that is true. what do you do about the recordings? Do you listen to them? That's the million dollar question. And I think, you know, when I'm working with that employee, I think one of the questions I would want to understand is what are the examples within the recordings and your belief that will prove your point or that would help me understand that, you know, where you are being set up to fail. Because hopefully what you can gain from that question is, you know, in this one on one, this conversation happened. In this one on one, and now they're using the recordings to define and describe to you, which could hopefully without you having to listen to eight months of recordings andor across this gray area of like Will this become evidence in my investigation? They may that may you may be able to use the context of the recording or the belief in the recording to maybe get to the base or the root of what you're looking for. you may get to a point where you may need to hear or may want to hear the example, but I, you know, I I think it would I think it would A depend on the state that I'm operating in and how much risk would come with that. If if this is a employee that is based in a state that has really tight laws on that, I would be clear with the employee that based on state or federal law, I don't feel comfortable using the recordings as a part of this. And I think there the transparency from me to them is critical. If it's a state that has a little bit more gray area, I may actually at that point consider listening to some pieces of that recording to to validate what they're saying. And I I think what comes with it is w how much risk are we willing to take on as an organization. to prove this employee's point. And if I have s if I feel like I have invested the time, the effort, the questions, the everything in it to get to the core of what this issue is and it's still unsubstantiated, will the recordings change that for me? Because I if I've done or been able to do the investigation in a way that would hopefully allow me to get to the answer without it, I may or may not actually Yeah. It's so true. It's like they're kind of like a they could be attempting sort of you know, piece of something that's there. But, you know, to your point, if it's eight months of recording, let's say, even if they're just having a monthly one-on-one, that's eight recordings, assuming an hour long, like that's a full day of listening. And that's if it's that on the low end of of the amount of recordings that you have, right? yeah, and and I love your suggestion of asking them what exactly is said in these that you think validates your claim or substantiates your situation. Cause you can use that as part of the interview. That can be the interview with the, you know, with the with the individual because it kind of gives them their chance to state their claim and then you use the interview as your sort of evidence and then you can bring that to the manager and say, This is what they're saying. or not what you know, not revealing it, but you know what I mean. Like the you're just trying to kind of get to the root of it in the interviews and use those, which tech with if they're recorded, they're recorded with consent. If they're not recorded, then they're written down and known that that's going to happen. That's a little bit more valid. And I I think you know, the recordings are tempting because there is a piece of it where it's like, is it the easy button? If I listen to this, will I be able to quickly validate or quickly, you know, unsubstantiate this? And I think there's a there's a tempting component to that. And you know, the the core question to ask is like what's the level of risk that you would want to take on as an organization in making this decision? I think there's a couple of sub questions that come with that. what will be the outcome of this? If the outcome of this is a coaching to the manager on how to better coach, then are is the risk actually there? Because the employees not getting fired, the manager's not getting fired. Is there risk that this person is going to take this to to a court to be settled? Because ultimately that's that's the the bigger question is we're not weighing the recordings in context to how it impacts our internal investigation. It's what are we doing to protect the company if this goes to 'Cause that's where it's going to become law, it's going to become debatable, it's going to win or lose you a case. But at the core of this investigation, how are you going to use the information that you get from that recording to to make the decision? If the issue is so, you know, so pervasive and so, you know, non negotiable that you might have to term the manager, that's a much different conversation too. Because the risk of using the recording, if a termination is going to happen is greater than using it to cope. Yep. Yep. And I love that you went there with can they bring it to outside legal counsel? Or can they bring it to, you know, whomever as a way that just kind of keeps it it it opens up more risk and and, you know, to the company. But there's also if it was it's almost like if it was obtained illegally, then that employee can't bring it to court because then they're openly saying, Hey, I did this illegal thing and they're opening themselves up there too. So It's kind of like good point 'cause their their lawyer would probably be like, We can't use this. Yeah. You know, they they they it depends on what's documented in your documents because they could if you reference the recording, could at least your reference of it be enough to, you know, sway something within a decision making from a legal proceeding. Yeah. Yeah. It's like you have to think about it how you're leaving breadcrumbs for someone to evaluate the effectiveness in your event of your investigation later. It's like they always said like email like it's gonna end up on the cover of the New York Times. Now I think it's becoming investigate like it's gonna be on the cover of the New York Times. It's like what breadcrumbs are you leaving to show? This is what I this is what I did. This is how I did it. This is why I came to the conclusion that I did. It's you know, I I think it's super important in the HR function to think about, you know, in the course of your investigation, what sort of investigation notes are you taking? How you know what language are you using in them? You know, ensuring that everything is fact-based, not opinion-based, and you know, tracking everything in a way that ultimately becomes legally defensible. And I frequently tell my team, I'm like, we never know what what may or may not go to court. The littlest thing may become the biggest issue in court. So we have to treat every single investigation with the same, you know, intent in the same perspective that everything we're doing is now becoming documentation for it. case. Yep. And it has to be consistent. Like the consist like you have to investigate everything the same, you know, the same way, the same sort of consistent process, because otherwise then it becomes, well, why was this case handled differently from another? And then that becomes part of the the in the whole case at the end of the day. I I have won court cases, you know, after you know being with organizations who have been sued because of the consistency of our investigation practices. And ultimately the you know, when you're sitting in front of whether it's a mediator or a judge who's looking at this, they're gonna look at that and say, you know, this employer has taken a reasonable amount of effort to fully investigate you know, every claim that's being made. And when you can say, you know, show the records of here's the amount of claims that came in, here's the tracker, here's how we investigate, here's the process, here's the forms, here's, you know, here, here, here. It all adds up to your ability to prove that you reasonably care and you reasonably investigate everything that comes into you. Mm-hmm. Yeah. And I think that's why so this is kind of like building on the do you listen to the recording question? So let's say it was legally obtained. Like let's say it's completely fine that this person recorded because the states that both parties were in, you know, it was single party consent, it's all fine. now Do you feel like you have to listen to it so that if it does end up discoverable somewhere, you want to know what's being discovered, right? Yeah. Yeah. I you know, I think I would weigh the the overall situation because I think question number one I would ask is does eight to sixteen hours of my time worth the protection in that moment? Or if this went to a legal proceeding where this will now become evidentiary? Is that the point where I listen to the sixteen hours so that I can be ahead of it at that point? And it's kind of the weight of like how big of a risk you and I think what I would weigh it against is are they, you know, what are they claiming in the moment and are they claiming anything above and beyond just being mistreated? But are they bringing in a race issue, a gender issue, a sexuality issue, you know, age? Like, if I heard that, then I think I would probably Cause once you once it's proven that you know about it, then you also have to prove that you did something about it. So it's also like it's a whole other can of worms that you're starting to open. And so you need to kind of have an idea of what you may find. And if it's not worth finding that out, and I don't mean and I mean if it's not worth worth finding that out, meaning there's no protected class issues, like it's just kind of two people that just don't really know how communicate, sometimes it's like, that's not really my business. I mean, you know, I think the part that is tough for the employee side of this is one, they if if that information is recorded on a personal device or on a laptop or, you know, something where the company can't access it, they could refuse to hand it over. So if it does become something that you need to listen to, that that is an interesting little obstacle that kind of gives a little bit of control back to the employee. But the big thing that I think I don't like to discredit real stories, but since this is a fake story, the thing that kind of discredits the whole claim is that this employee's been recording this for eight months. And hasn't said anything until there's a performance issue. So I'm immediately going to I think like when I kinda land at this, I'm like, I'm immediately going to like, well, why are you using this now? Like, you know, like why not if this if there's really an issue, why didn't you say something sooner? Did they say something sooner? Did we miss it? Right. Look back at prior investigations or prior things with this employee. Like maybe something was missed and this was a last ditch effort. Or maybe it is someone knowing they were gonna get terminated and looking for a way to protect themselves. We it could be anything. You raised two interesting things there. The first thing one of my favorite general counsels taught me a long time ago in investigations to be very conscientious of the questions you are asking and keep them focused on the issue at hand because every single investigation is really in a in a sitting in a pot. And if you ask the wrong question, you're gonna wind up with seven other investigations that probably didn't need to happen. Now on the flip side, sometimes they did need to happen and I'm so grateful when they do. But it's, you know, she was always, you know, in the recommendation that you have to ask within the scope of the the investigation you're in and not ask the general question, what else may be happening, you know, around that. And I I I've I've I've learned a lot from kind of thinking through that mentality. And I think the the second really great point that you bring up there is in that initial fact finding of this has been going on for eight months, one of the best questions to ask early on with that intake is have you brought this someone's attention before now. Yeah. And if not, why? And if you have, who? So that you can figure out why this is the first you as the HR person is now hearing about it in eight months. Yeah. And that's exactly what I'd be looking for. To be like, did we know about this and not do anything about it? Did we mess up somewhere? Which it happens, right? I mean, we are human. We are doing our best. It could be that it got messed up somewhere. It could be that there was turnover on the HR team and that S the conversation got stuck in someone's inbox who's no longer here. So the documentation is there, but it's unobtainable, right? Like there's so many different sort of factors that can kind of play into that. But you know, I I think this is there's so many different ways that it's fun to speculate when it's not you or when it's not a real situation. Well, I know that we're actually, believe it or not, we're at time. So I have one final question for you before we wrap up. If you were giving advice to, and I know this is not necessarily advice, but what's one thing that an HR person who might be navigating a situation like this today, what's one thing that they should keep in mind as they're doing this? I would say the the one piece of advice that I would give is don't let urgency create Uncertainty in this situation, there's so many nuances to it that it may be easy to to want to run quickly toward an idea, a concept, something within it. I think like in this scenario, we don't know if the manager has set the person up to fail or not. So we have to create space to understand that question. We don't know why the recordings were even, you know. thought to be, you know, a part of this or why they decided to record it. So don't rush to an assumption or rush that if they recorded it, we have a huge issue and this is, you know, like there's I think there's enough in this that it might be easy to quickly think you have a huge problem when at the core it actually might be a simple resolution. And so don't let the the urgency and the substance of this create or don't let the, you know, the the certainty or the urgency of this create this need to just blow it into the biggest thing that it may possibly be. Ask all the right questions, get to the core of it, preserve every document, but also, you know, just because it has this elevated thing that seems so big, don't let this let you immediately think that we had the highest risk situation. So that you still take all the right steps to get there. I think, you know, HR's job isn't to decide in the first fifteen minutes of an investigation what's right, what's wrong. You have to take it methodically and intentionally and slow yourself down. Cause I I think it's so easy to fall into that trap of my God, this is huge. I got like you just get that franticness and you just have to breathe and remember like this is just like any other investigation and follow the process that you have in place for everything that's happening. So good. I love that. You're right. It's easy to react to something. So it's like slow is smooth as they say, right? So it's just like slow it down, compartmentalize, take it one thing at a time. I think that you know HR's responsibility is to ultimately have the courage and the vulnerability to ask the right questions, lean in and support not only the business, but the people involved. Because at the core of this you have two humans. Two humans that I would hope you know are doing the best that they can and we're here to really help them with that and have the discipline to examine it in the right way. And not come in with a, you know, perceived bias one way or the other. Yeah. Beautifully stated and beautifully said. And thank you, Jeremy, so much for being here. This was so fun. There's like fifty different spirals we could go on with this, but I'll leave this here so that we're gonna I know, I can't believe this went so fast. I know. That's what happens, is like there's so much that you can kind of unpack. It's like every time I'm always like, We need to do a part two, a part three, let's just keep going. But when you're ready, I'll be back. And thank you for being here, Jeremy, for sharing all this with everybody, you know, who's listening to this. And for those who are listening, thank you. and I hope you have a great rest of your day. Thank you, everyone. Bye. And that's a wrap on the employee who recorded everything. Huge thanks to Jeremy Edmonds of Snooze. Here's what I'm taking away. Split things into two swim lanes. The employee complaint deserves a real investigation, and the recordings are a totally separate issue. Call legal early, which comes up a lot in these types of conversations. And you may not need to hit play on those recordings at all. Ask what's on them and what changed eight months ago or whenever your investigation story begins. Most of all, slow down and stay consistent. Jeremy has won court cases because every investigation followed the same documented processes. That's the kind of consistency that All Voices was built to give your team. I'm Rebecca Taylor and this has been HR Voices. Thanks for listening.