Asked to Comment about Colleagues Suspension

[ilovemydogandmrobama2]

Colleague has been suspended after a an individual report.

I know this as we have all been sent a questionnaire, 'inviting,' us to an interview with the Investigating Manager.

All of the charges have been listed.

This can't be right.

What is the reason for the suspension? I'm not a HR person or clued up on employment law so can't offer any real advice.

I did spend a lot of time reading tribunal listings after one of my colleagues went through the process and it is fairly common for staff to be interviewed as part of the tribunal investigation process.

The bit that might be odd is including the listed charges, because at this point they're still in an investigatory phase and I'd have thought it could introduce bias into the process.

Also, confidentiality. The member of staff hasn't been found "guilty" yet (for want of a better word) and if their employment continues, it might impair judgement against them and they could have a future case for unfair dismissal.

I'm not an expert, so take what I say with a pinch of salt but those are my opinions.

The allegations should absolutely not be listed and care should be taken to protect confidentiality throughout the process. I'm stunned you've received this.

This sounds like an internal investigation of a grievance or some sort of misconduct but if the person has been suspended, the com must be serious. Usually grievances are investigated but the person in question carries on working. It is odd that the mis conduct details are listed. Normally you’d be asked about them at the meeting. As PP mentioned, I assume there are strong warnings about confidentiality as there should be also at the time of any investigation meeting. The lack of confidentiality sounds concerning as the rights of all employees, including your colleague, should protected.

Thank you for your responses - the colleague lodged a grievance against another colleague after a physically aggressive incident, and date coincident with the investigations starting, an anonymous complaint was lodged.

So frustrating as colleague is the type who goes out of his way to help others and often puts himself in harms way in the process, but doesn't play management's game.

Totally agree that the allegations should not be listed, but apparently HR said it was OK

It is quite normal to list the charges.
They are usually called Terms of Reference.
Doesn't mean staff member is guilty but those attending interviews need to be aware of what the interview is about.

@Jammylou - yes of course - the charges were put to everyone colleague works with, and they were all interviewed.

For instance, he was charged with, 'being constantly late,' so others then piled on all the instances when he was late (as an example)

We had a colleague who clearly wasn't performing to any acceptable standard (education establishment). There was (yet) another incident and colleagues in the room were asked to provide a description of what happened. I did - it was the only time I was directly asked - and this colleague's behaviour was damaging. My description was evidence based on what I heard that day, what i saw and the after incident conversation - this colleague would try to engage me and other colleagues in a this isn't fair conversation. This was all after only 6 weeks. Frankly I was pleased to be asked and I genuinely hope that my feedback helped the institution get rid of this colleague with little impact. Of course the hiring managers were never sanctioned. The hiring was very suspect always and demonstrated how little SLT understood about that particular role.