Hi, DH is employed by a large agency/managed services (?) and they are employed by a very large company. Sorry to be vague, tryng not to name names. He has worked there for just over a year.
Last week he was involved in an incident where a fellow employee (who is employed by the large company as opposed to the agency but performs the same role as DH) shouted, screamed and threatened physical violence towards DH as he believed DH had not performed part of his role correctly. This was witnessed by two other employees. DH did not retaliate and raised a grievance with his line manager. The agency has today held a meeting with DH. I am a bit concerned from what DH has told me. During the meeting they asked DH what he envisages happening. DH replied that he didn't really know the answer but he could tell them that he felt extremely uncomfortable working with this man, there is obviously an atmosphere and that maybe the man might be moved to a different/similar role? They replied with lots of ummng and ahhing saying that might be difficult and maybe it would be DH that was moved. I'm a bit 
at this. Why should DH have to move etc?
To begin with I was a bit nonplussed that the man hadn't been suspended. The threat involved such things as "If we were elsewhere I'd drag you out of that fucking lorry and rip your fucking head off".
I have been involved with disciplinaries in the past but many years ago and I'm almost certainly out of the loop. But in my day that would have been classed as gross misconduct? Or not now? It would also appear that this man has shown this type of behaviour before. I have stressed to DH that whilst this is "interesting" it is not relevant to his case. The HR department of the agency has said he will hear from them in 10 days time, but meanwhile, any advice/thoughts?
Thanks