Disciplinary investigations and decision makers

dori2o

In a very large business (financial/investment sector) is it appropriate for the person who is bringing the disciplinary action, i. e. the manager in this case, to be the investigating officer, and for that particular managers manager, who have a very good working relationship, to be the decision maker, in order to ensure impartiality?

If not, at which point should this arrangement be questioned by the employee under investigation and is this grounds for appeal against any disciplinary action?

Thanks

TELLIT01

I wouldn't think it's appropriate for the person bringing the disciplinary action to be the person to investigate it. They are hardly an impartial third party, which is what I would expect to be brought in to do that.
The manager's manager is another matter. There is no reason they can't be impartial just because they get on well with your manager. In a large organisation, if you appealed the decision it would be investigated by other people and the person making the original decision would not look good if it appeared they had favoured their friend's opinion over the actual evidence.

sangie595

There's actually nothing all that unusual about this, and nothing that says that the "investigating officer" (assuming there is one because there doesn't have to be) must be impartial. It is common for a manager to bring a complaint and put the case. So unless your terms of employment or policies say differently, yes they can do this.

TELLIT01

Surely whoever is investigating the issue should be impartial, that is to say looks purely at the evidence, not favouring one side or the other on the basis of who they like more.

ERICS_MUM

What does your company handbook say about the disciplinary process ?

ohreally

You need to get sight of the policy document. Employers I’ve worked for had clear lines and what you describe may well constitute a contamination of the process.

I assume policies have been agreed in partnership with trade union input?

sangie595

TELLIT01 wrote: »

Surely whoever is investigating the issue should be impartial, that is to say looks purely at the evidence, not favouring one side or the other on the basis of who they like more.

Nope! Guidance not law says that it is preferable if an investigator is impartial - but often that may not even be possible. Smaller workplaces might even have the same person doing the disciplinary AND the appeal. And sometimes no investigator is necessary at all. The manager makes a complaint, and that's all it needs to go to disciplinary. None of these factors influence a tribunals decision as to fairness. Whether you did it or not is what counts. Evidence is evidence no matter who presents it.

TELLIT01

I hadn't thought of the situation with small companies. I worked for big firms all the time. The OP does say they work for a very large business in the financial sector, so I would expect them to have pretty stringent rules about the disciplinary process.

sangie595

TELLIT01 wrote: »

I hadn't thought of the situation with small companies. I worked for big firms all the time. The OP does say they work for a very large business in the financial sector, so I would expect them to have pretty stringent rules about the disciplinary process.

You'd be amazed. Many don't have any rules about the need for an investigatory officer, or impartiality of such an officer. Does yours? As in does your policy actually say that? Or are you assuming it? I bet the latter!

I may be wrong because I've been busy and haven't checked, but the OP seems familiar for frequently having issues with their employer. A history like that would worry me far more than a technicality that probably doesn't actually exist. Easier to advise based on facts and not suppositions.

dori2o

Its not my employer, I work in the public sector. This is for a family member who works for one of the big banks.

I dont know what their policy is, although ACAS do suggest that the investigator should be impartial and not directly involved.

sangie595

dori2o wrote: »

Its not my employer, I work in the public sector. This is for a family member who works for one of the big banks.

I dont know what their policy is, although ACAS do suggest that the investigator should be impartial and not directly involved.

ACAS can suggest anything they want. It isn't law. If it came to a dismissal, and if it came to a tribunal, what would matter is the content of the case - not whether somebody was allegedly partial or not. The allegation against your family member, whether it is true, and what the evidence is for it - that is what counts.