A recent article associated to the mystery of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy caught my attention. There are some things the public will never know because it is thought by people holding the power that it is not in their best interest for us to know. Most folks in my peer group remember where we were when we learned the President had been killed. I still have a scrape book that I pulled together chronicling the news stories and press releases associated with the death of President Kennedy. Most probably remember the picture of a small boy, holding a small American flag and saluting the casket of his father.
Years ago, I listened to three audio books written by Bill O’Reilly and Martin Dugard that began with the word “Killing”. The books were “Killing Kennedy”, “Killing Jesus” and “Killing Lincoln”.
I guess when it comes to totally new information, the book on “Killing Lincoln” held more surprises for me than the other two. The book was released on September 27, 2011. It was the first of the three books written. Even then, I basically had the storyline regarding President Lincoln etched somewhere inside my head. However, I was unaware that John Wilkes Booth did not act alone and that attempted murder of others in strategically important places also transpired that same night.
One of the biggest surprises included in the book “Killing Lincoln” was historical reference to the unconscionable act of President Lincoln’s lone bodyguard. John Parker was one of four policemen on the Washington police force assigned responsibility for guarding the President. The evening of the assassination instead of responsibly guarding the President, Parker opted to leave his post and go to the bar next door to the Ford Theatre and spend an extended period drinking. After all, who wants to watch a play entitled, “The American Cousin”?
I would think that vacating one’s post during his assigned shift would minimally be the basis for termination of one’s job. Parker’s negligence and dereliction of duty could arguably be said to be a contributing factor resulting in the death of the President. One would think that criminal charges would have resulted.
According to the historical record, Parker did not lose his job despite his failure to fulfill his responsibility. It was just “Parker being Parker”. If you don’t believe it, look at his record. Before being assigned the responsibility of being one of the four policemen responsible for guarding the President, the record shows:
“He was hauled before the police board numerous times facing a smorgasbord of charges that should have gotten him fired. But he received nothing more than an occasional reprimand. His infractions included conduct unbecoming an officer, using intemperate language and being drunk on duty. Charged with sleeping on a streetcar when he was supposed to be walking his beat, Parker declared that he heard duck’s quacking on the tram and climbed on to investigate. The charge was dismissed. When he was brought to the board for frequenting a house of prostitution, Parker argued that the proprietress had sent for him.”
How often in places of employment are employees excused from meeting minimal job expectations simply because they’ve never met them. Somehow their employment is somehow viewed as an entitlement without accountability.
Many years ago, when I worked for a public agency, I was assigned responsibility for supervising an employee who had been awarded her position based on an EEOC complaint. To say that I’ll never forget the employee is an understatement. Despite my best efforts to provide training, clear expectations regarding job performance, oversight and written corrective action plans, it eventually became clear the employee was consistently ineffective in her role.
Toward the end of her tenure working under my supervision, the employee eventually stopped showing up for employee conferences and sent her attorney instead. Providing supervision for the employee was a nightmare. She simply did not meet expectations regarding her role in that position. Consequently, it was my strong recommendation to HR that her employment be terminated.
I had carefully prepared written documentation to back up my recommendation. Legal counsel for the agency thought termination was risky considering the previous EEOC complaint. Consequently, HR negotiated a transfer for the employee to an unrelated section of the agency. Crazy making, isn’t it?
If I could do it again, would I do it differently? You bet I would in areas related to supervision of employees who fell short of meeting job expectations. Even when I worked for the public sector, I always attempted to be the kind of supervisor that promoted the best interest of employees and at the same time attempted to hold them accountable. However, sometimes under the auspices of “legal counsel”, in a spirit of “Let’s try one more thing to improve performance”, I deferred to their judgment. I’d be quicker to cut our losses now.
So how did John Parker, the absentee policeman and assigned body guard to President Lincoln manage to keep his job following the President’s assassination? It was probably a work situation like the one I just mentioned. You can count on it, “When employees are allowed to disregard policies and procedures, fail to meet job expectations and exercise less than prudent judgment, a supervisor’s failure to act quickly is tantamount to allowing substandard performance to become a way of life”. When employees fail to meet corrective action plans, continuation of poor performance becomes toxic to the work environment.
A workforce is only as strong as its weakest link. With John Parker on the Washington police force, the reputation of the agency and the safety of others was obviously at risk.
All My Best!
Don
Carpe Diem 