Round #440

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?

No, the same line manager who is the subject of the grievance should not chair the grievance hearing. To ensure fairness, impartiality, and compliance with best practices (and legal standards in many jurisdictions, such as the UK's ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures), the hearing must be conducted by someone independent. ### Key Reasons and Guidance: - **Impartiality Requirement**: The chair must be unbiased and able to make an objective decision. If the grievance is against the line manager, they have a clear conflict of interest, which could undermine the process and expose the employer to risks like unfair dismissal claims or tribunal complaints. - **Who Should Chair It?** - Ideally, a more senior manager (e.g., the line manager's superior) who has no direct involvement in the issue. - If no suitable internal option exists (e.g., in a small organization), an independent third party, such as someone from HR, another department, or an external mediator/adviser, should be appointed. - The employee should be informed of the chair's identity in advance and have the right to object if they believe there's bias. - **Process Steps (Based on Standard UK ACAS Guidelines)**: 1. **Acknowledge the Grievance**: The employer should respond in writing within a reasonable timeframe (e.g., 5 working days) and arrange the hearing. 2. **Notify Parties**: Inform both the employee and the line manager of the hearing details, including the chair's identity, date, time, and location (or virtual setup). 3. **Allow Representation**: The employee can bring a colleague or union representative to the hearing. 4. **Conduct the Hearing**: The chair investigates, hears evidence from all sides, and may adjourn for further information. 5. **Outcome and Appeal**: Provide a written decision within a reasonable time (e.g., 5-10 working days). The employee has the right to appeal to a more senior or independent person if dissatisfied. - **Legal Context**: - In the UK, following the ACAS Code is not legally binding but tribunals consider adherence when assessing reasonableness (e.g., in unfair dismissal cases). Failure to use an independent chair could weaken the employer's position. - Similar principles apply in other countries (e.g., under U.S. EEOC guidelines or EU directives on fair procedures), but consult local laws (e.g., via ACAS in the UK, or an employment lawyer). - If the grievance involves discrimination, harassment, or serious misconduct, escalate to HR or legal experts immediately. If this is in a specific country or involves unique circumstances (e.g., company policy), I recommend consulting your HR department, an employment solicitor, or resources like ACAS (helpline: 0300 123 1100 in the UK) for tailored advice. Document everything to protect all parties.

### Guidance on Grievance Hearings Under ACAS Code of Practice In the UK, formal grievance procedures are guided by the **ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures** (available on the ACAS website). This code is not legally binding but is considered by employment tribunals when assessing the fairness of procedures, and failure to follow it can lead to uplifts in compensation awards (up to 25%) in successful claims. #### Key Principle: Impartiality in Grievance Hearings When an employee raises a formal grievance **against their line manager**, the same manager **should not chair the grievance hearing**. This is to ensure the process is fair, impartial, and free from any perception of bias. The ACAS Code explicitly recommends involving an independent party to maintain trust in the procedure. - **Recommended Approach**: - The hearing should be chaired by a **more senior manager** (e.g., the line manager's superior) who has had no prior involvement in the matter. - If the organization is small and no suitable senior manager is available, an **independent third party** (e.g., an external HR advisor, ACAS mediator, or another impartial colleague from a different department) should be appointed. - The employee should be informed in advance of who will chair the hearing and have the opportunity to raise any objections if they believe the chair is not impartial. - **Why Not the Line Manager?** - The grievance is directly against them, creating an inherent conflict of interest. Allowing them to chair could undermine the process and expose the employer to claims of unfairness under Section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. - ACAS emphasizes that the investigator (who gathers evidence) and the decision-maker (who chairs the hearing) should ideally be different people, and neither should be the subject of the grievance. #### Related Procedures - **Investigation Stage**: Before the hearing, a separate, impartial investigation should be conducted (e.g., by HR or another manager). This is distinct from the hearing itself. - **Appeal Right**: If the employee is dissatisfied with the hearing outcome, they have a statutory right to appeal. The appeal should be heard by someone **even more senior or completely independent** from the original hearing chair (per ACAS Code, Paragraph 28). This ensures a fresh review. - **Grievance Investigation**: The overall process must be prompt, confidential, and documented. Employees should be allowed to be accompanied by a colleague or trade union representative at the hearing (ACAS Code, Paragraph 19). #### Best Practices for Employers 1. **Document Everything**: Keep records of the grievance, investigation, hearing, and decisions to demonstrate compliance. 2. **Timeframes**: Aim to hold the hearing within 5 working days of receipt (ACAS suggestion), unless exceptional circumstances apply. 3. **Training**: Ensure managers are trained on ACAS procedures to avoid procedural errors. 4. **Seek Advice**: In complex cases, consult ACAS (helpline: 0300 123 1100) or a legal/HR specialist early. If the grievance involves discrimination, bullying, or harassment, additional laws (e.g., Equality Act 2010) may apply, potentially requiring even stricter independence. For organization-specific policies, refer to your internal HR handbook, as it must align with (but can expand on) the ACAS Code. If this is a real scenario, recommend the employee or employer contacts ACAS for free, confidential advice.