Advice needed re grievance process - clueless and concerned

[brassick]

Here's the situation:

PA to a director of a company which is in the same group as my company, and who are based in the same building as my company has raised a grievance against him. As he is her line manager, it has had to go to the MD of the group.

For some confused reason, I have been asked to take the disciplinary hearing with her. (rest of group companies, including group MD situated far away from us). I am office manager of my company, and definitely lower in the hierarchy than the director of the other company.

Our HR woman has never had to deal with a similar situation, so isn't really sure how it should work. Neither have I, and neither do I.

With HR woman's permission, I have talked to my dh about this, as he works for a very large company with very clear procedures for this type of situation, and he has dealt with many grievances in his 20 years as a manager.

The way it would work in his company is that someone higher up than both of the people involved would meet with both of the people and make detailed notes on their side of the story, questioning as appropriate. They would have a separate person taking notes so the flow of the meeting isn't interrupted.

They would offer mediation, and if that wasn't accepted, would either take the person through disciplinary process (if grievance upheld) or dismiss the grievance. Either way, the person who raised the grievance would be told of the outcome and be given leave to appeal.

We have no set process other than a vague policy stated in the staff handbook. No talk of anyone talking to the director, just the PA. I REALLY don't want to have to meet with the director to discuss this, as he has a reputation of being a difficult man & anyway, it's not really my place to be questioning directors about their actions.

HR woman isn't sure whether I should see a copy of the letter with details of the grievance. .

This all feels wrong to me - how should this be dealt with? ACAS leaflet isn't v clear.

Help! anyone got any advice? I have to go out now, but will be back later...

The way your dh's office does it is standard (as far as I am aware. Usually it goes to senior person above those involved and they have one on one meetings with a note taker.

I think both the employee making the complaint and the one who has been complained about can take someone in with them - union rep or colleague (I've heard of someone taking their dh too but he was a lawyer).

Not sure why you are involved unless the MD has requested it (or the PA) - she may feel the MD would be biased towards her boss so the MD wants to cover himself by including someone who he deems as neutral and on her level (and female). I would email the MD directly and request he explains the proceedure and your involvement (but then I'm quite bulshy and am always happy to speak to seniors as equals - while showing respect obviously).

I can't imagine for one minute you have the authority to decide whether a grievance against a director of the company should be upheld or not, so you should not be involved in any decision-making capacity.

When you say your HR woman 'isn't sure how it should work', what do you mean exactly? The only thing that could be considered unusual about this grievance is that the people involved are very senior. Otherwise it sounds like a bog-standard employee-raises-grievance-against-line-manager situation, which I would hope your HR woman could cope with. Plus I would expect her to be able to take advice herself without relying on you to ask your DH. (Sorry for rant, incompetent HR is something I have zero tolerance of.)

Who has asked you to get involved and what exactly is your brief? You say yourself that as the grievance is about this director, it goes to the MD. He/she should hear the grievance, then decide whether to uphold it or not, then if upheld, decide what if any action to take against the director. Simples.

I imagine if the PA woman was happy to explain her grievance to you rather than this MD, you could perform that role, but only in a note-taking capacity, to report to the MD so he/she can take a decision about what the appropriate next steps are.

If the MD person is trying to avoid his/her responsibilities, your HR woman needs to step up and sort that out, pointing out that if the grievance isn't handled in an appropriate fair way, and demonstrated as being taken seriously, there are legal risks for the company.

Thank you both for your input.

I have been asked to get involved as the MD is apparently "too closely connected" (or something).

Haven't been told whether I will be involved in any decisions, I think I am just expected to talk to the PA and report back, but there has been no mention of any need for the director to have a meeting to give his side of the story-surely he should be given that right?

PA has been offered the right to have someone in the meeting but has declined.

HR woman is v inexperienced & is currently in charge of HR for the whole group (100 employees) working 22.5 hours per week...so under a lot of pressure.

Not sure why she hasn't called ACAS or the IPD for guidance (which I assume she is associated with as she is studying for some HR qualifications), as I say, I think she's a little overwhelmed by this.

I will talk to her again tomorrow armed with all of your advice.

Many thanks

ACAS has good guidance on best practice for dealing with grievances and also how they differ from disciplinaries. Hope it helps.

Dear god if the HR woman can't manage a grievance what on earth is she doing?

The CIPD have guidance, ACAS has clear guidance as mentioned.

In this scenario it might be better to bring in someone external to conduct the investigation for the reasons you've outlined: seniority, MD too close, no suitably qualified person. Some academics will do this for less than consultancy rates.

And whoever investigates will need to see the grievance letter... to know what to investigate!

Yes I agree perhaps someone external to hear the grievance and advise MD and HR woman on appropriate process and next actions.

Ok seems like you've missed a step here. Has anyone spoken to the PA in an informal capacity to find out whether mediation would be an option before going down a formal grievance route. I deal with this stuff all the time and very often a situation can be resolved by a getting the two parties together to discuss the matter - an apology often goes along way. Obviously if the the director's behaviour is not a one off and indicative of his "management style" then that may require a more formal approach but I am shocked that your HR Manager doesn't know what to do though!

Are you able to suggest to the company that they might want to bring in an outside HR expert and pay them to deal with this issue? We use a company who gives us helpline support step by step but we're Ok with most stuff. I suspect in your case that an actual person coming in to deal with it might be a wise investment. ( I'm assuming that HR consultants are sometimes available to work in that way).

Sorry - just realised that's already been discussed. This thing feels a bit odd to me as others have said. Do you think the company might be just wanting to go through the motions but have already decided not to uphold the grievance? Might explain why they don't seem too concerned about lack of experience.