Dignity at Work Guidance for Managers

Dignity at Work – Guidance for Managers

Purpose of Notes

The purpose of these notes is to provide guidance and support to managers who have to manage dignity at work issues as part of their responsibilities.

Introduction

The University is committed to ensuring that all employees are treated with dignity and respect whilst at work, and that acts of unfair treatment will not be tolerated. The University recognises that unfair treatment of employees undermines both the individual and the values of the University. The University will not tolerate or condone acts of bullying or harassment.

Every employee of the University is responsible for ensuring that their behaviour in the workplace is appropriate and compliant with the policies and procedures contained within the Fair Treatment Framework.

Responsibilities

It is the responsibility of University Managers to:

·  Manage employees in a supportive and positive way to resolve any complaints made under the Dignity at Work Policy and Procedure.

·  Support employees who have made a complaint throughout the informal or formal processes.

·  Ensure that any actions recommended following a Dignity at Work complaint are implemented as appropriate.

·  Promptly address any suspicions of bullying and harassment in their teams.

It is the responsibility of HR to:

·  Provide specialist guidance and support to managers dealing with complaints under the Procedure.

When an issue is raised to you

Employees are encouraged to raise any issues of dignity at work wherever possible. This maybe informally or formally. It may be that employees will discuss the issue with you before taking any action at all. In such cases:

·  Ensure the employee is aware of the Dignity at Work Policy and Procedure.

·  Advise them about their options – namely that they can raise the issue informally or through the formal procedure. Discuss with them what is likely to happen if they pursue the complaint either informally or formally. Ask them what they want to happen.

In the event that the employee wishes to raise a formal complaint, you will need to determine whether a full investigation into the matters raised is required. Considerations include:

·  The nature of the allegations raised.

·  The potential impact of the allegations on the individual or the University.

·  Relevant University Policies and Procedures

It maybe that you feel the complaint is so serious it should become formal straight away. Advice is available from HR.

If a formal investigation is required, the steps set out in the formal procedure should be followed. Further guidance is set out below.

Determine whether any special arrangements need to be put in place during the investigation to protect the individuals or the process.

Formal Complaints

If you are the investigating manager, it is good practice to arrange a formal meeting to hear the complaint as soon as possible, to ensure that the situation does not escalate. In any event, it should take place within 20 working days.

The role of the investigating manager is to establish all of the facts, make a decision, and where applicable, make recommendations as to next steps or additional actions.

It will also be necessary to inform the individual about whom a complaint has been made. It would be good practice to do this face to face initially, and follow it up in writing.

Confidentiality during an investigation

It is important that confidentiality be respected when dealing matters relating to dignity at work. Written records should be securely retained, and only be discussed with other employees if they are being interviewed as part of a formal investigation. Be careful where you keep electronic records. These should be held in a secure area on the R:Drive and should not be accessible to anyone else. If you do not have a secure area, you should password protect electronic documents relevant to the case.

Preparing for formal meetings

For all meetings, consider the following:

·  Arrange for someone to take notes of the meeting. This will normally be someone from HR.

·  Arrange a time for the hearing in a suitable room where there will be no interruptions.

·  Consider the provision of an interpreter or facilitator if there are understanding or language difficulties. This person may need to attend in addition to the trade union representative or work colleague.

·  Make provision for any reasonable adjustments to accommodate the needs of a person with disabilities.

·  Think about the structure of the hearing and make notes of the points you wish to cover.

·  Consider a list of questions that you wish to put to the employee in the first instance. Once you have met with them and fully understood the issues, you can make a plan for the rest of the process.

HR can help with preparations and advice.

Meeting with the complainant

It is normally good practice to meet with the employee bringing the complaint first. The purpose of the initial meeting is to enable the employee bringing the complaint to explain it in more detail and to gather sufficient information to undertake the necessary investigations.

Ask the employee in advance if they have any documents that they want to submit in relation to their complaint, and ask them to do so prior to the meeting so you can review them in advance.

During the meeting:

·  Confirm the process and the role of the investigator.

·  Ask the complainant to give their version of events in their own words.

·  Listen carefully and take notes.

·  Ask any questions to gain all of the relevant information.

·  Advise on next steps.

In relation to specific allegations, it is useful to ask:

·  When did the event take place?

·  Where did it take place?

·  Did anyone else witness the behaviour?

·  Has the issue complained about happened previously?

·  Was anyone else aware of the situation?

·  How did the complainant respond?

It may also be appropriate to ask some more general and broad questions:

·  What is the general atmosphere like in the working environment / team?

·  What are working relationships like within the working environment / team?

·  What is typical behaviour in the working environment / team?

After the initial meeting

Once the formal complaint is fully understood, it is the role of the manager to carry out such as investigations as are required in order to reach a decision. This might include:

·  Identifying and interviewing witnesses.

·  An interview with the person against whom the complaint has been made.

·  Reviewing any relevant documentation.

It may be useful to put together an investigation plan and list of potential witnesses at this stage.

It is important to keep the employee bringing the complaint up to date on progress and expected timescales during the process.

Interviewing the employee against whom a complaint is made

It is important that the employee fully understands the allegations made, in order that they may fully respond to them.

The purpose of this meeting is to gather as much information as possible, and gain the perspectives of the employee.

During the meeting:

·  Confirm the role of the investigator and the process being followed.

·  Put forward the allegations and ask the employee to respond to them.

·  Ask such question that are necessary to gather relevant information.

·  Advise the employee on the next steps in the process.

Be prepared for the employee being investigated to react emotionally and allow them time to digest the allegations and to respond in a more measured way. You may have to adjourn the initial meeting and reconvene.

It can also be difficult to manager ongoing work relationships once an allegation has been made. Consider whether temporary measures need to be put in place, for example, a change in reporting line, a change in location or allowing an employee to work from home where the role permits. It is good practice to have a conversation with the complaint about how they feel about the situation. Ensure that all relevant risks to individuals and the process have been considered when making your decision.

Witnesses

As with all of the interviews under the Dignity at Work Policy and Procedure, notes must be taken at witness interviews. During the meeting, confirm the nature of the allegations made, and the scope of the investigation. Ask if the witness is aware of any other relevant information.

Witnesses should be advised that their comments form part of the investigation and may therefore be provided to the employee against whom the complaint has been made. They should also be made aware of the requirements for confidentiality.

Occasionally, witnesses ask for anonymity. This may be possible. However, prior to agreeing, it is necessary to balance the information that this witness can provide with the potential impact of the anonymity. For example, can the employee who is the alleged perpetrator fully put their version of events if witnesses are anonymous? Consider if there is any other evidence to confirm their statement. Also consider why they might feel that they need to be anonymous. Where anonymous witness evidence is agreed, remove the name and any other identifying information from any documents provided to the person against whom the complaint was made.

Making a decision

Once a full investigation has been concluded, the manager must decide whether to uphold the complaint (agree with the points raised by the employee) or reject it (disagree with the points made).

It is also possible to partially uphold some aspects of the complaint whilst not upholding others.

In some cases, it may be straightforward to reach a decision. For example, the behaviour may be admitted, or there will be overwhelming evidence that the relevant act or acts took place. Others may be less clear, or there will be contradictory evidence.

Reaching a decision will involve an assessment of all of the evidence gathered, and considering the ‘balance of probabilities’. You do not need to ‘prove’ that the act complained of took place, but you do need to form a reasonable belief that they did, based on your assessment of the evidence.

Take time to reflect before making a decision. Relevant factors can include:

·  The nature and seriousness of the behaviour

·  How similar matters have been dealt with. You are not bound to follow previous decisions in all cases, but they can provide guidance to approach.

·  Any mitigating factors that are present.

·  Whether there have been any previous, similar complaints.

·  Any relevant University policies and procedures.

Remember that in the case of harassment, it is not the intention of the alleged perpetrator, but the impact upon the recipient that is relevant.

When a decision is made, a report should be compiled, summarising the complaint, investigation findings, and decision. The report should be sent to the commissioning manager for further action.

Parties to the investigation should be advised of the outcome as soon as possible after the investigation is concluded. This should also consider what to communicate to the wider team and witnesses. At the conclusion of the process, please pass all of your notes and documents to HR for secure storage.

The employee or employees who were the subject of the complaint will be notified of the outcome of the complaint in writing and be advised of any action that is being taken as a result.

Links to Disciplinary Procedure

It may be the case that, in the event a complaint is upheld, there is a recommendation for action under the Disciplinary Procedure. A separate process under this procedure will follow, and the details of your investigation will form part of it. In the event that the Dignity at Work investigation concludes disciplinary action may be appropriate, the evidence gathered under this process may substitute a disciplinary investigation. A different manager will be appointed to manage this process. You may be interviewed as part of the disciplinary investigation.

It would be acceptable to inform the complainant that the matter has been referred to the Disciplinary Procedure. It would not however be appropriate to confirm the nature of level of any sanction applied under it.

Recommendations

At the end of an investigation, the manager may feel it appropriate to make recommendations. In the event that the complaint is not upheld, there may be no recommendations at all.

Other examples include:

•  training or coaching for parties involved

•  mediation

•  notification that further similar action may result in disciplinary action

•  to initiate a disciplinary hearing

•  changes to policy or procedure

•  further investigation into other matters uncovered

Also consider whether or not there is an opportunity put something in place to prevent it happening again in the future, or whether it is necessary to re-confirm standards of behaviour within a team or department.

Regardless of the outcome of the complaint, there is likely to be a requirement to re-introduce parties back into the workplace, or re-establish working relationships. It is good practice to discuss with all parties their views on this, and if they require any support. Mediation may also be suitable in these circumstances.

Appeals

Where a complaint has not been upheld or is only partially upheld, the employee who made the original complaint may appeal. The appeal must be submitted in writing, stating the full grounds of appeal, within ten working days of the date on which the decision was issued.

The grounds for the appeal should be detailed and relate solely to the decision made. The grounds for the appeal should be addressed under one or both of the following headings:

•  Procedural omission or error

•  New evidence presented which could not have been made available during the original investigation.

Appeals should be heard in accordance with the schedule in the Dignity at Work Policy and Procedure.

Appeals should follow the format laid out in the checklist contained at Appendix 2.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between bullying and harassment?

There are different definitions of bullying and harassment; these can be found in the Dignity at Work Policy and Procedure. However, it isn’t unusual for people to use these terms interchangeably to mean similar things. The Equality Act defines harassment, but bullying doesn’t have a legal definition.