Round #427

An employee has raised a formal grievance against their line manager. Can the same manager chair the grievance hearing or must it be someone independent?

### UK Employment Law Context (ACAS Guidelines) In the UK, formal grievances are typically handled under the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. This code provides a statutory framework that employers must follow reasonably to avoid potential unfair dismissal claims or other tribunal issues. Here's a clear breakdown of your question: #### Can the Same Manager Chair the Grievance Hearing? - **No, it is not appropriate or recommended** for the line manager against whom the grievance is raised to chair the hearing. The ACAS Code explicitly advises that the hearing should be conducted by someone impartial and independent from the issue to ensure fairness and avoid any perception of bias. - Allowing the accused manager to chair could undermine the process, making it vulnerable to challenge (e.g., in an employment tribunal) on grounds of procedural unfairness. #### Who Should Chair It Instead? - **An independent person** should handle the hearing, such as: - A more senior manager (e.g., the line manager's superior or someone from HR). - An external mediator or advisor if internal options are limited (especially in small organizations). - The employee raising the grievance has the right to request that the hearing is conducted by someone independent, and employers should accommodate this where reasonably possible. - If the grievance involves serious allegations (e.g., harassment or discrimination), involving HR or an external party early is even more critical. #### Key Steps in the Process 1. **Written Grievance**: The employee submits it in writing to their employer (usually HR or a senior manager). 2. **Investigation**: Before the hearing, a thorough, impartial investigation should occur (often by someone other than the accused manager). 3. **Hearing**: Arranged promptly (ideally within a week). The employee can bring a companion (colleague or union rep). The chair listens to both sides and may ask questions. 4. **Outcome**: A written decision is provided within a reasonable timeframe (e.g., one week), with the right to appeal to another independent party. 5. **Appeal**: If unhappy, the employee can appeal, which must be heard by someone even more senior or independent. #### Employer Responsibilities - Follow the ACAS Code to the letter—failure to do so can lead to tribunal awards being increased by up to 25% if the employee wins a claim. - Document everything meticulously to demonstrate fairness. - If your organization has its own grievance policy, it must align with ACAS guidelines. If this is in a different country (e.g., US, where there's no direct equivalent but similar principles apply under at-will employment or anti-discrimination laws), the advice may vary—consult local employment law. For tailored advice, recommend the employee or employer speaks to ACAS (helpline: 0300 123 1100) or a solicitor. This isn't legal advice, just a summary based on standard practices.

### UK ACAS Code of Practice on Grievances In the UK, formal grievances in the workplace are governed by the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures (effective since 2009, with updates). This code provides practical guidance for employers to handle such matters fairly and reasonably. While not legally binding, employment tribunals must consider adherence to it when assessing unfair dismissal or discrimination claims, potentially adjusting compensation by up to 25% if the code is unreasonably ignored. #### Key Principle: Independence in Grievance Hearings The ACAS Code explicitly recommends that grievance hearings should be conducted by someone **independent** to avoid any perception of bias or conflict of interest. Specifically: - **Paragraph 9** of the Code states: "The employee should be invited in writing to a meeting to discuss the grievance and told what the procedure will be. The meeting should be held without unreasonable delay... The meeting should be held by someone who is impartial and has not previously been involved in the matter." - For grievances raised against a line manager (as in your scenario), it is **not appropriate** for that same manager to chair the hearing. Doing so could undermine the process's fairness, as the manager is the subject of the complaint and may have a vested interest in the outcome. Instead, the employer should appoint: - A more senior manager who is independent of the issue. - If the organization is small or no suitable internal person is available, an external third party (e.g., via ACAS mediation or an independent advisor). - In larger organizations, a dedicated HR representative or a panel including impartial members. #### Steps for Handling the Grievance To comply with the Code, the employer should follow these steps (outlined in Paragraphs 6–12): 1. **Acknowledge the Grievance Promptly**: Respond in writing within 5 working days, confirming receipt and outlining the next steps. 2. **Appoint an Independent Chair**: Select someone not involved in the grievance. Inform the employee of the chair's identity and their right to be accompanied (e.g., by a colleague or union representative) at the hearing. 3. **Conduct the Hearing**: Hold the meeting without unreasonable delay (ideally within 2 weeks of the grievance being raised). Allow the employee to explain their concerns, present evidence, and call witnesses. The chair should investigate thoroughly, which may involve separate interviews. 4. **Adjourn if Needed**: If more information is required (e.g., for a full investigation), adjourn the hearing and reconvene later. 5. **Reach a Decision**: Provide a written decision within a reasonable timeframe (e.g., 1 week), explaining the outcome and any actions. Inform the employee of their right to appeal. 6. **Appeal Process**: If the employee appeals, this should be heard by a more senior, independent person (not the original chair). The appeal decision is final. #### Exceptions and Best Practices - **Small Employers**: In very small businesses (e.g., fewer than 10 employees), finding full independence can be challenging, but the employer must still act reasonably—e.g., by involving an external mediator. Tribunals recognize practical limitations but expect efforts to maintain impartiality. - **Investigation vs. Hearing**: If a formal investigation is needed before the hearing, this can be led by HR or an independent party, but the hearing itself must remain separate and chaired impartially. - **Potential Risks of Non-Compliance**: Allowing the line manager to chair could lead to claims of unfair treatment. If the grievance involves protected characteristics (e.g., discrimination under the Equality Act 2010), it might escalate to a tribunal, where bias would be scrutinized. For tailored advice, consult the full ACAS Code (available on the ACAS website) or seek legal/HR guidance. Employers can also contact ACAS helpline (0300 123 1100) for free support. If this is outside the UK, local labor laws (e.g., in the US, via EEOC guidelines) may differ but often emphasize similar impartiality principles.