Fair and seen to be fair

Article Index
Overview

When business representative organisations, such as IoD and CBI, claim there is too much bureaucracy the most often quoted example is employment legislation; their frustration, at needing to treat people fairly and take care when seeking to make them unemployed, is evident.

Collective and individual consultation takes time and effort when there are important things to do like monitoring targets, chasing suppliers and glitzing customers. Too frequently, managers asked to list their responsibilities forget people or put them well down the list; people are a human resource to utilise, as any other facility in their control.

Over the last couple of years I have been asked to advise and support a not insignificant number of friends and friends-of-friends faced by formal procedures which could lead to job loss. My corporate employment has been in large, high-profile companies very keen to manage well, so it has been educational. Inevitably, some inconsistencies occur because managers are people too. Understanding this does not excuse it.

Examples

• A large multi-national company has a very thorough process for headcount reduction, drawn up by a highly credible consultancy. So what could go wrong? In short, the pressure of personal relationships does. Rather than follow process one particular senior manager, keen to assuage his own guilt, called two people into his office separately, without notification, with no offer of representation, no witness and irrespective of any script blurted out the words ‘You are redundant’. All of which leaves the HR department trying to pick up the pieces.
• A business of 250 staff initiated disciplinary action against one young man for misuse of the internet, during paid overtime. I was allowed to attend the investigation meeting. It was so well attended there was even a secretary to take verbatim notes. The accused actually admitted the offence to me, so we were fighting an uphill-battle to save his job. The good news was that the Disciplinary Procedure stated, ‘Gross misconduct may lead to dismissal’. Further, ‘Any appeal will be heard by the Managing Director’. The senior person carrying out the investigation was also going to be the chair of the formal disciplinary meeting (poor practice in itself). It is worth adding the company had taken advice from an HR professional. Early into the discussion I referred to the statement which meant dismissal wasn’t an inevitable outcome. The lead manager said dismissal would be the result. Naturally, my reply was to remind him it would be his decision and he had discretion. ‘No’, he replied, the MD had already decided! As soon as I began to point out all of the errors made, this guy literally ran out of the room with his hands over his ears shouting that he wasn’t allowed to talk to me. Later, this manager rang the young man faced with dismissal and tried to blame me for the meeting breaking up. Strange to relate, they were then prepared to negotiate a small release package.
• A young woman, who had never had an appraisal, was dismissed without the right of appeal for failing to meet sales targets. Ironically, she had met the targets given at the start of the year but, without her knowledge, her objectives had been changed.

These are just three examples of poor behaviour and more often than not I am not allowed into internal meetings. The management’s justification, and one I have used previously, is the ACAS guidelines indicate individuals can only be accompanied by a colleague or trade union representative. Whether the exclusion of any other type of representation is to protect organisations from the attendance of solicitors or promote union membership, the effect of my exclusion is to abandon vulnerable people in a situation in which their most fundamental rights are being challenged. In truth, if a company follows good processes I would be their best witness and I am very clear with individuals if I assess their position or claim as wrong.

Conclusion

• Putting in place good procedure is not difficult. It does require a desire to treat people well and avoid tribunals.
• Consistent application of processes is absolutely critical. Training, support and scripts are of paramount importance.
• Proper representation helps the process rather than hinders it.
• ACAS must reconsider its guidance regarding the people who can accompany people in disciplinary or redundancy situations.