Editor's message: If, following an investigation into alleged misconduct or a capability issue, you decide that a hearing is required, it is important that the arrangements meet the required standards of procedural fairness, for example in relation to who chairs the meeting, the employee's right to be accompanied and the way you deal with any new information.
At the hearing, each side should have the opportunity to explain its case, so that the person or panel making the decision has heard all the relevant evidence.
Susie Munro, senior employment law editor
Employers are increasingly encountering employees covertly recording disciplinary and grievance meetings. In this week's podcast, we discuss how an employer should deal with this.
In this week's podcast, we explain what HR should do when faced with some tricky scenarios related to the right to be accompanied at disciplinary hearings. The seven scenarios discussed include a worker requesting a companion with a history of disruptive behaviour, and a worker asking for a postponement at the last minute to find a companion.
Updated to include information on Adeshina v St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and others, in which one of the issues the Court of Appeal considered was fairness in an appeal process.
An employment tribunal has held that the employer breached the claimant's right to be accompanied when it refused to allow his chosen companions, trade union representatives, to accompany him at a disciplinary appeal hearing. However, it awarded compensation of £2 only, on the basis that the employer had understandable reasons for the refusal.
In Khan v Stripestar Ltd EAT/0022/15, the EAT held that an employment tribunal was entitled to find that a dismissal was fair despite a wholly defective and unfair initial disciplinary hearing, because the subsequent internal appeal cured the defects earlier in the process.
Ashok Kanani reviews three noteworthy cases that provide lessons for employers on their disciplinary procedures.
A recent case has caused uncertainty about the HR role in disciplinary procedures. HR should certainly not be judge, jury and hangman, writes John Charlton.
Chris Cook is partner and head of employment and Keely Rushmore is senior associate at SA Law. They round up the latest rulings.
Practical guidance on dealing with a situation where an employee requests to record a meeting or has recorded a meeting covertly.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that there are no limitations on the nature and extent of the deficiencies in a first stage disciplinary procedure that can be cured by a thorough and effective appeal.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to disciplinary hearings.