The Importance of Planning, Communication, and Dignity in Employee Terminations
When we think of disruptive behavior in the workplace, we usually imagine someone who is overly loud, argumentative, or interrupts the workday in obnoxious ways. However, disruptive behavior in the workplace extends far beyond noisy interruptions—it comprises any actions or patterns of conduct that interfere with normal organizational operations, compromise workplace safety, or hinder the productivity and cohesiveness of the work environment. This includes when an employer fires one of its employees.
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated that in August 2025 in the United States there was an average of more than 164,000 employment separations every day, both voluntary and involuntary. It can be reasonably inferred that employment terminations, given that can be a stressful event, can escalate into disruptive, dangerous, or even hostile behavior. Unfortunately, there is currently no comprehensive national statistic that specifically tracks how many of these terminations escalate.
Before Firing, Due Diligence
It is important to clarify the term at-will employment, as it is often confused with other terms or wrongly defined by laypeople.
At-will employment is an agreement in which either the employee or the employer may terminate the employment at any time and for nearly any lawful reason. However, it is important to recognize that certain organizations, U.S. states, or employment arrangements provide additional protections requiring that a termination be for cause. Under these provisions, an employer can dismiss an employee only for clearly documented and legitimate reasons, typically at the end of an unsuccessful probationary period.
At-will employment offers employers flexibility to adjust their workforce as business needs evolve, whether due to economic challenges, shifts in organizational mission or vision, or other significant operational changes. This flexibility can be critical to an organization’s ability to remain viable and responsive in a dynamic environment. It also gives employees the freedom and flexibility to change jobs for a variety of reasons.
On top of the federal, state, and local legal limitations for lawfully terminating an employee’s position, many organizations implement policies creating additional requirements on the termination process, such as clear documentation of performance issues or misconduct. While these policies protect employees by ensuring fair and consistent treatment, they also shield the organization from legal exposure—including a wrongful termination lawsuit, where an employee alleges that the dismissal was carried out in a hostile, retaliatory, or otherwise unlawful manner.
Before terminating someone’s employment, consider if this is the only option. Is there instead a performance plan or probationary status that could be applied? Has feedback previously been provided and documented? Is there an established policy outlining the organization’s approach to progressive discipline, or a disciplinary matrix incorporated into policy to help mitigate the risk of wrongful termination claims?
It is essential that any disciplinary actions have been thoroughly documented. Well-documented progressive discipline can serve as a critical resource for both human resources (HR) and the legal department in demonstrating the legitimate reasons and necessity for the employee’s firing. Additionally, such documentation can be referenced during pre-separation interviews and investigative discussions with the employee.
When behavioral or performance concerns are properly recorded, including instances in which the employee has acknowledged prior infractions through signed counseling statements or written warnings, the organization is better positioned to show that the employee was made aware of their conduct and given opportunities to improve, thereby reinforcing the fairness and validity of the termination decision.
Every Dismissal is Disruptive
Although unfortunate, firing an employee is sometimes necessary or even routine. However, this action unavoidably disrupts a business’s daily operations—remaining employees often absorb the workload of the terminated individual, which can increase stress, extend project timelines, and reduce product quality. It takes time, energy, and experience for a new employee to become effective and reduce the workload.
Employee discussions or rumors about the termination can further delay service and indicate additional stress among the remaining workforce. Due to legal or additional requirements for privacy, much information about a termination may be limited or confidential.
While some employment terminations can be the result of a mutual decision, not every outgoing employee may agree with the decision, leaving room for greater disruptions.
For example, terminations present a significant risk when it comes to protecting trade secrets or proprietary company knowledge. The security department should monitor the dismissal process to ensure appropriate steps are taken to maintain confidentiality.
There is also the risk of violence if the situation escalates into a hostile termination, where the disgruntled employee presents a threat to other staff, the organization, or even him or herself. This means that security should anticipate and thoughtfully prepare for potentially hostile terminations in advance. Drawing upon guidance outlined in ASIS International’s Protection of Assets manuals, as well as best practices recommended by the Association of Threat Assessment Professionals (ATAP), employment terminations should be planned and executed proactively rather than handled reactively by security.
Employee discussions or rumors about the termination can further delay service and indicate additional stress among the remaining workforce.
Meaningful pre-separation engagement is an integral component of the termination process. Employees facing a possible or probable termination should be afforded regular, transparent communication with their direct supervisors. It is essential for all managers to recognize that the loss of employment can be an inherently stressful experience, often intensifying existing financial, medical, or family-related pressures. Adopting an empathetic approach and maintaining an open dialogue are critical to prepare the employee and help to de-escalate potential tension during this period of transition.
It is prudent to avoid an immediate, reactionary termination, such as declaring immediately after an incident, “You’re fired!” In cases involving severe employee misconduct or policy violations, it is generally advisable to first place the employee on paid administrative leave. The use of unpaid leave should be reserved for exceptional circumstances only. Providing paid leave throughout a fair and impartial investigation upholds the principle of treating the employee with dignity and mitigates the risk of potential legal liability. Conversely, prematurely placing an employee on unpaid leave may be seen as punitive. In this instance, the employee could subsequently claim that he or she was unfairly targeted or disciplined and denied a thorough and objective investigation.
Even in extreme cases, such as where an employee is identified as the aggressor in a workplace violence allegation or has committed a significant safety violation, it is still advisable to place the employee on paid administrative leave. This measured approach not only provides time and space for an unbiased investigation supported by security, HR, and legal, but it is also an opportunity for tensions to subside and for all parties to maintain a calm and professional demeanor.
Permitting an employee to separate with paid administrative leave—or at least ensuring that a proactive investigation occurs ahead of a termination—allows human resources and the security department adequate time to assess potential threats to the organization. This time can be used to conduct comprehensive behavioral risk assessments, evaluate any indications of leakage through threatening or concerning statements, and review the employee’s history of behavioral concerns, if applicable. The investigation should draw upon multiple credible sources, including witness statements, relevant documentation, surveillance footage, and other supporting evidence to substantiate the organization’s decision and ensure that the termination is handled in a fair, defensible, and safety-conscious manner.
Along with due diligence on behalf of the organization, this time also affords the employee an opportunity to de-escalate privately and preserve their dignity in the eyes of colleagues and peers. The employee may even choose to separate willingly from the organization after having had time to think.
Again, the loss of a job can be financially burdensome, and other issues in a person’s life can add further stress. In addition to paid administrative leave, another de-escalation technique is providing a severance package or short-term pay if the person leaves without incident.
“One of the challenges in any potential hostile termination is the need to provide the exiting employee with a ‘soft landing.’ This means considering what can be defined as ‘benevolent severance,’ which could include a graduated salary pay off of two to four weeks, based on the person’s behavioral compliance, and providing a continuation of medical benefits or EAP [employee assistance program] services for 30 days,” says Steve Albrecht, CPP, an expert in workplace violence prevention.
When it comes to the termination meeting, it should not happen on a Friday. Ending someone’s employment immediately before a weekend or extended period away from work can result in intensifying feelings of anger, humiliation, or hopelessness in the affected employee, while simultaneously limiting their immediate access to HR or other organizational support services. Additionally, employees may be less likely to fully process the information communicated during the separation meeting and may have important follow-up questions or concerns that cannot be promptly addressed while the organization is closed. Scheduling a termination earlier in the workweek provides greater opportunities for support, follow-up communication, and a more orderly transition.
Discrete and carefully planned meetings and communications should be conducted with any employee who may pose a potential threat or display hostile behavior during the termination process. It is essential to provide him or her with clear instructions about returning company property, retrieving any personal belongings, and other applicable restrictions—such as limitations on re-entering company premises. The termination meeting should occur in a neutral, private location, but one where neither the employee nor individuals informing the employee about the termination feel confined or trapped.
In situations involving an employee with the potential for hostile behavior, it is advisable to arrange for security personnel or, if circumstances warrant, law enforcement to be present or nearby. The security department should be kept fully informed so they can prepare and distribute any necessary information to staff, allowing them to recognize the terminated employee in case he or she attempts to return to the premises.
Furthermore, a designated manager or point of contact should be assigned to the departing employee to ensure consistent follow-up and to address any subsequent questions or concerns that may arise after the separation.
Throughout these communications, it is essential that the employee fully understands that multiple follow-up conversations and meetings will occur after the termination. Proper planning should include the use of a clear script and the presence of a witness to document the discussion. The employee should be informed that a representative from management or HR will reach out to them within a few days, again approximately one week later, and likely once more around one month after the termination.
This structured follow-up serves to address all questions, ensure all separation-related documents are signed and finalized, and provide assurance that all matters have been properly concluded. It not only reinforces clear boundaries and closure for the former employee, but it also allows the organization to observe and assess whether the individual’s post-termination demeanor or behavior indicate a potential risk to the business or its personnel.
Scheduling a termination earlier in the workweek provides greater opportunities for support, follow-up communication, and a more orderly transition.
In addition to planned follow-up communications, the organization should continue monitoring any employee terminated under circumstances that suggest the fallout of hostility. Security personnel should maintain heightened vigilance by reviewing relevant social media activity, remaining informed through colleagues or contacts who maintain a relationship with the former employee, and tracking any public statements that may reflect threats, grievances, or the intent to cause harm. It is essential to acknowledge that an employee’s departure does not inherently eliminate the possibility of future risk to the organization, its personnel, or its assets.
There are numerous job forums and recruiting websites where current and former employees may post commentary about their employment experiences. The security department should monitor these platforms for any negative, damaging, or threatening statements that indicate a risk to the organization’s reputation or safety. Additionally, platforms such as Reddit—a widely used content-sharing and discussion site with millions of active users—often contain employment-related discussion threads where individuals may post grievances or sensitive information.
Regularly monitoring such platforms can help the organization identify and assess any harmful or threatening comments made by former employees, supporting early intervention and appropriate response measures.
The Benefits of Maintaining Dignity
The loss of a job can be an intensely emotional and often humiliating experience, particularly when it occurs in the presence of peers, which may further compound feelings of resentment or grievance. To mitigate this, it is essential to approach termination proceedings with compassion, composure, and respect for the individual’s dignity. Supervisors should acknowledge the employees’ emotions and actively work to de-escalate any tension from the outset.
This may include highlighting examples of the employee’s positive contributions or commendable work, while clearly and candidly explaining the specific shortcomings or concerns that have led to the decision to terminate employment. Concluding the meeting on a constructive note, such as ensuring the employee knows whom to contact for any additional information, or, if appropriate, offering to provide a letter of recommendation, can help the employee feel supported during this difficult transition and may reduce the potential for lingering hostility. According to Albrecht, a letter does not have to be overly complicated or praising. It can be as simple as creating a letter that verifies the person’s dates of employment, salary, job title, and job duties.
While these actions may seem appeasing to the outgoing employee, they support the safety of everyone involved and likely create a positive separation experience rather than a dangerous one.
Providing sufficient time and employing a dignity-centered approach during the termination process can significantly reduce the potential threat factors while fostering a sense of support and respect for the departing employee. This approach helps mitigate emotional escalation, preserves the individual’s self-worth, and decreases the likelihood of retaliatory or disruptive incidents.
“The function of these efforts is not to reward the exiting employee for past behavioral problems, but to use a structured set of items to lessen the sting of the dismissal, to allow a more face-saving departure, and, more importantly, to minimize one of the primary drivers for workplace violence—the desire for revenge, based on how they were treated,” Albrecht says.
An additional indirect benefit lies in how the remaining workforce perceives the process. Employee departures are rarely confidential, and the absence of a team member often creates an increased workload for others. When the remaining staff observe leadership handling a termination with professionalism and compassion, it reinforces their confidence in organizational integrity. Employees are more likely to view their employer positively and feel reassured that, should they ever face similar circumstances, the process would be handled fairly and without unnecessary embarrassment.
It is a common misconception to assume that a terminated employee is isolated or socially withdrawn from coworkers—in reality, this is often not the case. Frequently, the departing employee maintains strong personal relationships and friendships within the organization. These colleagues may learn about the situation well before others and are likely to hear only the perspective of the exiting employee, which will likely favorably portray him or her.
Implementing a dignity-centered approach to termination helps counteract rumors or negative perceptions that the organization acts harshly or unfairly. When an employer demonstrates professionalism, empathy, and respect throughout the process, it reinforces a culture of integrity and fairness. Furthermore, when permissible within legal and privacy boundaries, offering limited and transparent communication about the reasons for the separation can help others understand that the decision was more complex than what they may have been told. This transparency preserves trust among remaining employees and reinforces confidence in the organization’s leadership and values.
Implementing a dignity-centered approach to termination helps counteract rumors or negative perceptions that the organization acts harshly or unfairly.
When appropriate and legally permissible, employers should communicate transparently about the change in staffing and how workloads will be redistributed. This level of communication helps minimize rumors, builds trust, and ensures employees understand the operational adjustments being made. Clear, timely communication reduces anxiety and promotes cohesion, further strengthening the employer’s reputation for fairness and respect in the workplace.
Terminations are a routine part of organizational operations, and every organization must be prepared to manage them effectively. It is important to recognize that these situations can be highly disruptive and emotionally damaging to an employee, meaning that hostile reactions should be anticipated. The most effective way to mitigate risks is through careful planning, adherence to a prepared script, implementation of safety protocols, and providing the employee with an opportunity to retain their dignity. These practices significantly reduce the likelihood of a hostile termination escalating into a critical incident.
Kevin Jones, CPP, holds a Master of Science degree in public safety and a graduate-level certificate in executive protection and strategic security. He is a site security manager for a nationwide technology company, and he previously worked as a school security manager, conducting armed protection and threat assessments. Prior to that role, Jones spent more than 19 years in law enforcement and more than a decade as a hostage negotiator. He regularly conducts behavioral threat assessments and security audits, and is passionate about crisis intervention, de-escalation, and early intervention. Jones has experienced firsthand active shooter and workplace violence incidents and strives to help prevent them, including by developing training curriculum from personal experiences.
