Appeal for a grievance

[funnysneeze]

NC.

One of my colleagues submitted a grievance and it wasn't withheld. Was about the business/manager who is new in post.

So now it's been appealed and gone to another senior manager for review (director).

Is anything going to come of it? Surely they can't go in favour of the other outcome and uphold everything? What's the point of it being appealed?

Everything is second hand info, but I note the union (not recognised by business) didn't attend.

Any other explanation?

I'm just curious about the team because our morale is so low ATM.

Do you mean it wasn't upheld? Withheld is completely different word and connotation. So it was a complaint against someone that was dismissed or penalised somehow?

Then appealed and as part of the appeal it goes to someone else for review. The whole point of a review is that it is thoroughly considered once more and it may be dismissed/punished as prior, or it may be upheld.

Of course if there is an appeal process the original decision can be overturned. It's the whole point of having an appeals process in the first place. It happens in courts all across the land all of the time. You can appeal a parking ticket, why shouldn't the appeals process be something within employment scenarios?

The whole point of an appeal is to ensure not only due process but also fairness. Of course they can overturn the original decision. And that can be appealed.

I can't comment on why the union didn't attend - and you haven't specified to which 'bit' and how much they were or were not involved in the original case and now the subsequent appeal.

You can't appeal a parking ticket after you've paid.

I'm asking for people who work in HR etc.

Why would they overturn a grievance?

Also what new info would need for be presented?

I was genuinely trying to help - but you're talking nonsense now. Apples? Come back to this thread in the morning with more information and I will help, but for now this is really vague and weird.

I don't have any more information

Come back in the morning, you're not making sense with the apples stuff. Have a rest.

Apples?

you're not making sense with the apples stuff.

Oh come on. It's a typo/autocorrect for appeals.

Whether or not the court has to consider an appeal is a different matter.

Your company should have a grievance policy and the process will be laid out in that. An appeal is a typical option (whether the grievance was upheld or not) and the opportunity to appeal is available to both parties.

Thank you. It's a document and you can see who's read it last,,, which is why I don't want to open it lol.

Any grievance outcome can be appealed but only because of a flaw in process not to rerun the whole grievance and get a different outcome. Sonthings like time lines not being followed, respondent was unable to offer own relevant witnesses, improper weighing of evidence.

An appeal will only overturn an outcome if the process wasn’t followed correctly or new evidence is submitted.

it’s not a second bite of the cherry

I used to be a union rep for a government department. In twenty years of accompanying people to grievance meetings, I only saw two grievances upheld in full (and neither had any impact on the person who had behaved badly - they were asked to apologise but neither did). Some were partially upheld, but most were dismissed, particularly when a senior member of staff was involved.

Can you right-click and download it? Alternatively check your employee handbook that you should have received when you joined. These often have all key policies stated in them.

Sorry you've had such snarky replies OP. So what I understand is one of your colleagues has complained (raised a grievance) about another one of your colleagues. That has been looked into or investigated, considered and the complaint was not upheld. But the complainant has now appealed. Is that right?

An appeal stage is a completely normal part of any grievance procedure. It is required as part of the ACAS code for employers. It usually entails a fresh decision maker or panel of decision makers who haven't been previously involved (often more senior that the original decision maker) reviewing the decision to uphold or not uphold the grievance. This usually entails a further meeting with the complainant in which they explain why they feel the original decision made was wrong, and the decision maker explains why they feel the decision was right. Sometimes the appeal may be a purely paper based review but as I say usually a meeting. Usually the appeal meeting doesn't need to call witnesses including the person who is being complained about, as like others have said an appeal is usually not a full rehearing of the original grievance but is more checking that a fair process has been followed.

I work in HR and I would say it is rare for appeals to be successful, but that doesn't mean they're pointless, it's part of ensuring our processes are fair and being properly implemented. On the rare occasion they are successful, it is usually either because some new information has come to light that wasn't available to the original panel, or some significant error of process e.g. the person being denied trade union representation, the hearing being held in the complainant's absence without them being given sufficient opportunity to attend, crucial information not being given to the decision maker, things like that. And even then, it's not necessarily a given that the complaint will get their desired outcome, because it may well end up that the outcome is the same even with the new information or whatever.

So difficult as it is OP, I'd try not to worry and let the process play out. Grievance processes can feel slow and as though they favour the complainant rather than the person complained about but actually I'd say on the whole it's the other way round as it's very rare for someone to get sacked or moved jobs as a result of these processes which is the outcome the complainant often wants (but it doesn't feel that way and it generally ends up feeling like a lose-lose-lose outcome sadly - a loss for the complainant, a loss for the person complained about and a loss for others involved who get sucked into a conflict).

Thank you. Her union didn't attend on this occasion

Ok but union not in attendance is not necessarily grounds for a successful appeal. It's the employee's responsibility to arrange representation if they want it, the employer needs to accommodate union attendance to a reasonable degree but unless she was erroneously told she could not have her union there, or the hearing was deliberately and repeatedly scheduled at a time/place the panel knew the union rep couldn't attend, I personally wouldn't be advising that as grounds for a successful appeal. And even if yes, the appeal succeeded on that ground, what would probably happen would be there was a rehearing with the union rep there, possibly with a new decision maker/ panel and they may well still come to the exact same conclusion as the first panel (union reps don't have magic powers after all, of course they are a great help to the employee in presenting their case but if the facts don't support it it won't change the outcome)

Not generally allowed to intro new info at appeal level - you usually have to appeal the process.

Apologies I meant the union didn't attend the appeal

Oh is that what it was?! Honestly because there was a lack of cohesion I took it on face value and didn't realise it was a typo!

You are in the wrong.

Also an employer isn't a criminal conviction. Employers don't uphold the law, there are only best practice

I didn't say any of that!

I work on grievances and appeals. As others have said the appeal isn’t an opportunity to re run the process. Your colleague will have appealed on a particular basis, e.g. evidence that is new or was not considered. I have heard a number of appeals. It is unusual for an appeal to completely overturn the grievance outcome in my experience. But I do believe that could happen. I have at times done more work on some appeals than the original decision maker did on the grievance- to get to the bottom of things. And at times, I have disagreed with the original decision maker or made a slightly different recommendation. But all of these things turn on the circumstances and the people involved. So without knowing all about it in detail, no one on this forum can realistically tell you what is likely to happen.

I have been involved as a manager in many grievances, appeals, etc.
I have overturned a decision at appeal, however I had to clearly state my (30) points of evidence - easily done in this case - as to why.
I have also had cases where I was the manager and it has gone to appeal. In one case the appeal manager agreed with my decision but wanted to up the punishment, but that isn’t possible in our policy.
HTH OP

Yes a grievance outcome can be overturned on appeal. I chair many hearings and have overturned the original decision on a small number of occasions. It’ doesn’t happen often when the original process was thorough. However when it isn’t then it’s the responsibility of the appeal chair to deliver a fair outcome based on the points raised. The last case where I overturned the decision had very strong evidence to support the grievance and the original chair (new to chairing) hadn’t considered it at all. It was crystal clear the grievance should have been upheld so my decision reflected that.
Whether or not the union rep was there, as long as the rest of the process was fair, is irrelevant.