From India, Madras
Going by the description of the exit of your friend, it appears that she has been terminated due to non-performance. When RM visited her store, he must have observed some glaring lapse or egregiousness that does not behove well for the stature of the manager. Hence her on spot termination. Neither theory of HR Management nor law permit this type of termination. Nevertheless, when power gets into the head of the senior managers, they behave like this.
Regional Manager after his visit, should have discussed his observations with the Store Manager. She should have been given chance to explain her position. If not convinced, he could have told her to put in her papers. Rather than doing this, he terminated your friend instantaneously and a cover up of background verification has been given.
Anyway, if your friend joined in Jul 2017 then she must be on the probation. Even if the legal procedure would have been followed nothing much would have happened. They could have terminated her with a day's notice.
For HR Professionals: - HR professionals always vie for employee retention and to retain employees they conduct employee engagement activities. However, a culture of the company that permits on spot terminations, in a company without culture justice or fairness, can the engagement activities work? If at all engagement is there, it would be physical engagement and not mental engagement. Was it that difficult to make employee's termination less painful? News about on spot termination must have spread in the entire store or even in the other stores as well. With the news of this kind floating around, will it foster salubrious employee relations?
For the originator of the post: - This is a professional forum. Therefore, before uploading the post, take care of grammar and punctuation. Write the post on MS word and then copy it.
From India, Bangalore