If a salesperson skips orders, cancels items from sales, or fails to complete tasks, first check the specific transactions and find out why. A drop in revenue, a customer complaint, or a stock discrepancy does not by itself prove sabotage. A conclusion that actions were deliberate requires evidence, and disciplinary action requires a lawful basis and procedure.
If the disruption is ongoing, the manager should first arrange fulfillment of current orders: identify what is delayed, assign responsibility, and notify customers of revised timelines. Choose one problem process to investigate. Preserve documents, hear the employee’s account, and find out whether they understood the task, were trained in the required operation, and had everything needed to do the work. Then agree what the employee and manager will do and when they will review the result. If you establish a breach of work duties, assess the employee’s specific actions, the circumstances, and the consequences.
Signs worth checking
In this article, sabotage means deliberately obstructing the store’s operations. However, an owner initially sees only the outcome: an order was not shipped, an item could not be found, or a price was changed without explanation. To investigate, describe the event without judging the employee’s character or motives.
| What happened | What to check | Where to start |
|---|---|---|
| Orders are shipped late | Who received the task, whether the item was in stock, when payment arrived, and the shift’s workload | Compare the processing times for several orders with the agreed procedure |
| The salesperson often cancels items | Reasons for cancellations, scanning errors, customer refusals, and links to specific sales | Review individual transactions with the salesperson |
| An item is in the records but cannot be found | Receipts, sales, transfers, storage location, and actual quantity | Count selected items and reconcile the documents |
| An employee repeatedly fails to complete a task | The duty, deadline, priority, training, access to required information, and the employee’s explanation | Reconstruct the sequence of events and record exactly what was left undone |
Repeated incidents are a reason to examine the process more closely. They do not automatically establish intent. Likewise, disagreement with a manager, reporting an error, or asking for a change in workload does not prove sabotage.
How to find the cause of a disruption
The UK service Acas advises employers to first find out why work performance has deteriorated. This management guidance can inform conversations with the team; employment decisions in Ukraine must be made under Ukrainian law. Acas guidance on performance problems.
Check the task, training, and resources
Ask the employee to explain how they understood the task. Find out who set the deadline, whether another manager gave conflicting instructions, and what the employee was expected to do when an obstacle arose. Separately check whether they were shown the required operation and could carry it out independently.
To find out why an employee delayed a shipment, check whether they had packing materials and access to the orders, whether the equipment was working, and when the carrier collected parcels. If the delay was caused by how the work was organized, the manager should assign someone to remove the specific obstacle and set a deadline. The manager should also provide the employee with the tools needed to complete the task.
Work goals should match the employee’s normal duties and workload, as Acas recommends. Assess performance on matters the person can influence, taking the conditions of the specific shift into account. Acas guidance on work goals.
Have a private conversation
Give specific examples: “Three paid orders had not been shipped by the agreed time. Let’s check what happened with each one.” Let the employee explain the sequence of actions, then compare their account with the records.
- Ask when the employee received the task and what they did next.
- Find out at what stage the obstacle arose and whom they told about it.
- Clarify what help or instruction they need to complete the task next time.
- Agree how the employee will report delays going forward.
If the employee performs other tasks well, name those results specifically. Gallup notes that constructive feedback is more likely to prompt action when managers also recognize employees’ contributions. At the same time, explain clearly what needs to change. Gallup research on feedback and recognition.
How to gather facts and check for improvement
For each incident, record the date, task, person responsible, expected result, and what actually happened. Add the document or order number, the employee’s explanation, and the consequences for the store. Keep source documents separate from your own conclusions so that a later review makes clear what those conclusions are based on.
Compare several sources: orders, warehouse documents, payment data, and the results of a stock count. A program entry by itself does not explain the employee’s motive. If several people use the same account, find out who carried out the specific transaction.
If you suspect deliberate obstruction of work, record exactly which actions you are investigating. Gather information that supports the suspicion and information that contradicts it. Ask the employee to explain the actions and check their account against the documents; speak with other people involved if needed. In your findings, state what you established, which inconsistencies remain, and what is missing to conclude there was intent. If there is not enough information, record that and continue checking without accusing the employee of sabotage. Acas recommends checking evidence from both sides and assessing its reliability. This is management guidance; employers in Ukraine make legal decisions under Ukrainian law. Acas guidance on investigating the facts.
After the conversation, draw up a short plan: what the employee will do, what support the manager will provide, and when they will review the result. For daily order packing, you could review the next few shifts; for an infrequent operation, review the next occasions when it is performed. This is a working agreement, not a time limit set by law.
Hypothetical example: in the first period, the store shipped 6 of 30 orders late, or 20%. After responsibilities were clarified and training was provided, 2 of 40 were delayed, or 5%. The share of delayed orders fell by 15 percentage points. Also check the reasons for the two delays and whether the conditions were comparable: workload, order complexity, product availability, and carrier operations. This result shows a change in the process, but does not prove that the earlier delays were deliberate.
How Torgsoft helps review canceled items
In Torgsoft, you can enable logging when an item is removed from a sale. In the menu «Налаштування → Параметри → Доступ» (“Settings → Parameters → Access”), activate «Реєструвати видалення товару з реалізації» (“Log item removal from a sale”) and choose an option: enter a reason, identify the responsible person, or enter both. For options involving a responsible person, the help guide also describes scanning their badge and selecting responsible employees. Before using this feature, check the setting names in your version of the program.
In «Склад → Скасовані товари з реалізацій» (“Warehouse → Canceled items from sales”), the owner can review the sale time, item, barcode, quantity, price, salesperson, and accounting center—the store or warehouse associated with the transaction. You can check the cancellation reason if you have configured the system to request one. If you need the salespeople’s explanations, choose «Введення причини» (“Enter reason”) or «Введення причини і відповідального» (“Enter reason and responsible person”). The report can be printed or exported to Excel. Explain to salespeople how to enter a reason, and regularly review cancellations that remain unexplained. Torgsoft instructions for canceled items.
Enable logging before the period you plan to review. A cancellation may have an ordinary work-related reason, so compare it with the salesperson’s explanation, sales documents, and actual stock. The program helps gather information for a review; the employer makes the finding about misconduct and decides how to respond to the employee.
What to do if a breach of work duties is confirmed
The rules of the Labor Code of Ukraine apply to store employees. Under Article 147, disciplinary sanctions are a reprimand or dismissal; legislation may provide for other sanctions for certain categories. Dismissal requires a specific legal ground. Calling something “sabotage” does not create one.
- Identify the duty the employee breached and the document that established it. Compare the facts with the employee’s explanation and the circumstances in which the work was performed.
- Before imposing a sanction, request a written explanation from the employee. An informal work conversation does not replace the requirement in Article 149 of the Labor Code.
- Check the deadlines. Under Article 148 of the Labor Code, the employer must impose a sanction promptly after discovering the misconduct. The maximum period is one month from the date of discovery, excluding time when the employee was released from work due to temporary incapacity or was on leave. A sanction may not be imposed later than six months from the date the misconduct was committed.
- Take into account the seriousness of the breach, the damage caused, the circumstances, and the employee’s previous work. Only one disciplinary sanction may be imposed for a single breach.
- Issue the sanction by order or directive and notify the employee in writing against signature. The decision must be made by the body authorized to hire that employee.
Under point 3 of part one of Article 40 of the Labor Code, an employer may dismiss an employee for repeated failure, without valid reason, to perform duties established by the employment contract or internal work rules. This requires establishing a new culpable breach committed after an earlier disciplinary sanction. Check whether the employer lawfully imposed the earlier sanction and whether it was removed early. Also take into account Article 151 of the Labor Code: if the employee receives no new disciplinary sanction during the year after a sanction is imposed, they are deemed to have no disciplinary record. Several poor performance indicators do not establish these conditions. Before dismissal, review the new breach, the legality and continued validity of earlier sanctions, the documents, and the guarantees applicable to the specific employee with an employment law specialist. The Supreme Court explains the requirement for a new breach.
For theft of the employer’s property, point 8 of part one of Article 40 requires a criminal conviction that has become final or a decision by a competent authority imposing an administrative sanction. A shortage alone or the owner’s internal finding is not enough for dismissal on this ground.
Special rules during martial law
Before dismissing an employee under point 3 of Article 40, the general rule requires the employer to obtain consent from the elected body of the primary trade union or a trade union representative if the employee is a member of that union. Also check the exceptions under Article 43-1 of the Labor Code. During martial law, the employer does not apply Article 43, except when dismissing employees elected to trade union bodies; this procedure is set out in Article 5 of Law No. 2136-IX.
As a general rule, the Labor Code restricts dismissal at the employer’s initiative while an employee is on sick leave or other leave. During martial law, Law No. 2136-IX allows such a dismissal to be formalized with the first working day after the end of the incapacity or leave as the effective date. This permission does not apply to maternity leave or childcare leave until the child is three years old. It also does not remove the need for a lawful ground for dismissal.
Do not assess an employee’s absence without taking wartime circumstances into account. During martial law, an employee whose workplace is located in an area of active hostilities may not be dismissed for unauthorized absence under point 4 of part one of Article 40. Nor should suspension of an employment contract be used as punishment: Article 13 of Law No. 2136-IX links suspension to both parties being unable to perform their duties because of armed aggression and expressly prohibits using it as concealed punishment.
Why you cannot impose arbitrary deductions from wages
Do not introduce a “fine for a mistake” or a “fine for sabotage” as a disciplinary sanction for a salesperson. Article 127 of the Labor Code allows deductions from wages only in cases provided for by law. Compensation for damage requires a separate legal review and proper procedure.
Before seeking compensation from an employee, the employer must establish actual direct damage and check whether the employee caused it through culpable, unlawful acts or omissions that breached work duties. Article 130 of the Labor Code permits material liability only within the limits and procedure established by law. An employee is not liable for damage arising from normal production and business risk, or for damage caused in a state of necessity. Liability for lost profits may apply only to officials. Do not deduct calculated “lost revenue” from a salesperson’s pay.
Even when the employer has a lawful basis for a deduction, it must comply with the limits in Article 128 of the Labor Code. At each payment, the total of all deductions generally may not exceed 20% of the wages due to the employee; in specific cases provided by law, the limit is 50%. If deductions are made under several enforcement documents, the employee must be left at least 50% of their earnings. An exception applies to deductions while serving corrective labor and to child support for minor children: the overall limit is 70%. These percentages do not, by themselves, authorize an employer to withhold money. Article 129 prohibits deductions from severance pay, compensation, and other payments that the law protects from recovery.
How to organize daily oversight in a store
Assign someone responsible for each stage of work: receiving goods, checking payment, packing, shipping, and shift handover. Prepare a short instruction for operations where the team makes mistakes, and check performance in practice. Explain in advance whom to notify about an obstacle and who will resolve an issue the employee cannot handle alone.
Choose a few indicators for regular review: overdue orders, unexplained cancellations, and discrepancies found after a stock count. For each, decide who will check the cause and how the result will be recorded. If a breach recurs after the conditions have been corrected, return to the specific facts and the employee’s explanation. This gives the owner grounds for the next decision and a way to check whether the store’s operations have recovered.
Official sources on employment decisions
- Labor Code of Ukraine dated 10.12.1971 No. 322-VIII: Article 40, points 3 and 8 of part one; Articles 43, 43-1, 127–130, and 147–151.
- Law of Ukraine “On the Organization of Labor Relations under Martial Law” dated 15.03.2022 No. 2136-IX: Article 5, parts 1–3; Article 13.
Go back to the previous step