Get all about Employee Law And Relations

Question: Identify the good practices related with the management of disciplinary matters in organizations? Answer: Introduction: This assignment discusses the good practices in relation to the management of disciplinary procedures in organizations and explores with the aid of ACAS Code of practice and also the models like the CIPD guidelines. Furthermore, the first part of the assignment discusses the challenges that are present in organizations in relations to the disciplinary processes and practices and have been explored. For this purpose, the key components of a fair disciplinary process have been discussed and some of the challenges that can be faced by the organizations in their attempt to implement a disciplinary process in the organization have also been evaluated. At the same time, recent case law has also been discussed to find out the good practice principles that have been discussed by the courts in these cases. For this purpose, the ACAS Code of Practice provides guidelines to the employers regarding the disciplinary and grievance procedures that need to be adopted by them while dealing with issues that may arise at workplace. It also needs to be noted that although failures on the part of employers to follow those procedure may not make the employer liable for proceedings, but the employment tribunal may note this fact when it is meditating on particular case (ACAS, 2004). It is also worth mentioning that certain challenges may be present regarding the disciplinary practices and procedures that need to be adopted by the employers for the purpose of dealing with these matters. CIPD or the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development also provides definitive and impartial point of view to policymakers and opinion formers. Before proceeding further, it may be helpful to briefly describe what is the meaning of disciplinary and grievance procedures in this context. For this purpose, these procedures are the frameworks that help the employers and employees by providing a clear structure that can be used for the purpose of dealing with the issues arising at the workplace (Kelly, 1998). A large number of HR professionals are wondering why they have to deal with so many time-consuming and costly grievance and disciplinary processes. For example, in a recent report by the CIPD which was titled as conflict management: a shift in direction?, It was found that 47% of of the organizations had trained line managers to deal with "difficult conversations" or to handle conflict. It was also the method to deal with one race issues that revealed the greatest rise in the frequency of use. Therefore, the use of disciplinary action arguments procedure has increased by 29% and 28% respectively. Instead of HR professionals, the line managers are in the best position to find out the potential conflict situations in their teams but they may not have the competence or the competence to intervene. The result is that we may either avoid the issue and eventually becomes out of control. On the other hand, the early interventions by the line managers may backfire as a result of their lack o f skills. The ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures provides practical guidance that can be used for handling these issues at the workplace. However, according to the good practices that have been mentioned by the ACAS Code of Practice, it is required that the employers should make sure that all the employees of the organization are treated in the same way under similar circumstances. At the same time, these good practices also require that it is very important for the employers to deal with these matters reasonably and in a fair way (Cully et al., 1999). According to this good practices related with the disciplinary procedures, it is also require that all the applicable laws are followed by the employers and at the same time, the employers also follow the Code of Practice. At this point, it also needs to be mentioned that in most of the cases, the employers have their own procedures to deal with disciplinary matters but these were procedures generally comply with the Code (Law Society, 2008). The CIPD believes that several issues escalate rapidly due to the reason that the employees are too quick in asserting their rights when generally it is simply a case of two people not getting on as a result of ineffective communication. Under such circumstances, the best way is to talk about the underlying reason of conflict. This is also done by the qualified mediators, in a more structured way, however the line managers who have the right skills can also deal with lower levels of conflict equally successfully. The important skills that are required in this regard are active listening, impartiality and effective questioning. At the same time, these procedures should also help the employers in taking appropriate and timely action, whenever required. In this regard, it is also required that the procedure adopted by employers should allow both the employees and employers to agree regarding the appropriate tools as well as the timescale for making improvements regarding the performance or the conduct of an employee (Davies and Freedland, 2007). The disciplinary procedure adopted by the employers should also help in dealing with these matters without taking the help of external processes related resolving disputes or without the need for taking recourse to employment tribunal. Another significant thing is that with the help of the procedure adopted by the employer, it can be established before an employment tribunal that the procedure has been followed by the employer in a case where an employee had made a complaint before the tribunal regarding the way, the employee was dismissed from service by the organiza tion. In this part, certain examples from relevant cases have been discussed with a view to identifying good practice principles. For example, in O'Farrill v New Manage Ltd t/a Hooks Gym London Shootfighters (2011), it was decided by the court that the employer had to clearly explain the alleged misconduct to the employee, during the disciplinary process. At the same time, good practices also require that the employer should remain constant regarding the accusation made by it against the employee throughout the proceedings (Law Society, 2008). As a result, if any new allegations have been discovered by the employer while the disciplinary proceedings are already going on against the employee, such allegations can be made a part of the disciplinary process but in such a case, it is very significant that the disciplinary sanctions that are imposed against the employee are only based on the allegations that have been appropriately investigated and at the same time, only if they have been broug ht to the notice of the employee during the proceedings (Kelly, 1998). Another significant case related with good practices regarding disciplinary procedures is that of Campbell v Mitie Managed Services Ltd. (2009). The issue in this case was that the employee was denied the right to be accompanied during disciplinary proceedings. In this regard, it needs to be noted that although this is a statutory right of employees, still the ACAS Code reminds the employers that they should allow the employees to be accompanied at the disciplinary proceedings. Therefore, the court stated that whenever the employee has been invited to attend any disciplinary or grievance proceeding and such an employee had reasonably requested the employer to allow him or her to be accompanied during these proceedings, the requests should be granted by the employer (Behfar, Mannix and Peterson, 2011). In the same way, in Bentley v Supertravel Omnibus Ltd (2010), the court has stated that in order to have a best chance to successfully defend the claim made in the employment tribunal, clear record should be present with the employers regarding each stage of the disciplinary process. On the other hand, if the witnesses only have to rely on their memory, the court stated that it is very easy for the claimant to point out discrepancies in the evidence (Gibbons, 2007). In this part of the assignment, the policies, procedures and practices related with the disciplinary process adopted by Boots UK have been analyzed. In order to deal with these issues, the company has a Code of Conduct and Business Ethics. This Code provides the principles and standards that need to be upheld by all the employees and other stakeholders and at the same time, they should be adopted and applied by the company in all its dealings including the dealings of the company with its employees. At the same time, although detailed guidelines have been provided by the Code, still in the employee is not sure regarding the appropriate course of action in a particular situation, the employees encouraged to seek guidance. In view of the Code of Practice adopted by Boots UK, it may we recognize that for the purpose of operating effectively, the organizations are required to establish standards related performance and conduct and these may include company rules regarding these matters. In this context, it needs to be noted that there are several potential issues that can be generally resolved by the parties, informally (Gibbons, 2007). For example, in case of issues related with unsatisfactory performance or issues involving minor misconduct can be usually resolved with the help of informal processes. It has been seen that in such cases, avoid with the employee can significantly help in improving the performance or the conduct that particular employee. Regarding the code of conduct that has been adopted by BOOTS UK, it can be said that it is in accordance with the Code of Conduct that has been provided by ACAS and fulfills the requirements related with ensuring fairness in these matters. Are the same ti me, the court also provides a standard of reasonable behavior that can be applied in most of the cases. In this way, it can be said that the Code adopted by the company can help the organization and its employees in effectively dealing with disciplinary matters arising at the workplace (Bennett, 2014). In this regard, there is another significant matter that needs to be noted. For example, the employees have been provided with a statutory right to be accompanied by a trade union representative or a colleague during the disciplinary meetings. On the other hand, if the employer is not satisfied with the decision, they should also follow the appeals procedure present in the organization (Lewis and Simpson, 1981). It also needs to be mentioned in this context that although the law does not prescribe any particular form for conducting a disciplinary meeting, still the ACAS Code of Practice provides basic guidance regarding the disciplinary and grievance matters. In this regard, the principles related with the handling of disciplinary situations at the workplace have been provided in the Code. The disciplinary rules that are applicable in Boots Ltd include the matter is related with the kind of employees, time keeping, health and safety, absence and in the same way, it also covers the use of Internet and telephones by the employees (Conway and Briner, 2005). Therefore, it is clear that during the disciplinary meeting, the employees have been provided with a statutory right to be accompanied. This right has also been recognized by the company in the present case. As a result, whenever an employee has been invited by the company to attend a meeting related with the disciplinary issue, the employee can make a request to be accompanied by a colleague or a trade union representative. On the other hand, the manager hearing the allegations during the meeting can also be accompanied by a professional advisor. On the basis of the decision given in John-Charles v NHS Business Services Authority, certain conclusions and recommendations can be made in this case. Therefore it can be concluded in this case that the employers are always required to make sure that all relevant matters in case of a disciplinary decision are fully explained to the employees. In the same way, the employers are also required to ensure that an opportunity has been provided to the employee to make a representation regarding all the relevant issues. In case where the hearing had been finished and an issue becomes relevant, while earlier it was not considered as relevant, the employers should reconvene the hearing and in this way, an opportunity should be provided to the employee to present their side of the story (Gibbons, 2007). On the other hand, if this is not done, it is likely that an employment tribunal may arrive at the conclusion that the dismissal of the employee was unfair. In view of this decision, it also becomes clear that the employers are required to follow the principles of natural justice. For example in this case, the appeal was allowed by the EAT on the grounds of natural justice, as in this case, the claimant was told by the employer that sanctions will be considered only after appointing has been made regarding the disciplinary allegations but the employee was not advise regarding the importance assumed by the warning and in the same way, the employee was not provided an opportunity to make representations regarding that point. As a result, although a right of appeal was later on provided to the employee but it did not answer the question if the decision of the employer to dismiss the employee can be considered unfair as a result of this breach of the principles of natural justice (Gibbons, 2007). Therefore, on the basis of the decision given by the Employment Appeals Tribunal, it can be concluded that it is very important that the disciplinary proceedings adopted by the employers also fulfill the requirements of natural justice. Conclusion In the present assignment, in first part, the key components related with a fair disciplinary process have been analyzed, particularly with the help of ACAS Code and other models. After evaluating the challenges that may be faced in the implementation of disciplinary processes in an organization, relevant examples have been discussed from the case law in which the courts have identified good practice principles related with disciplinary proceedings (CIPD, 2013). In the next part of the assignment, the policies, procedures and practices adopted by Boot UK regarding the disciplinary processes have been analyzed. Are the same time, any potential tension that may arise between the other HR policies have been explored and in light of the decision given in John-Charles v NHS Business Services Authority, certain conclusions and recommendations have been made for the company. References ACAS (2004) Code of Practice on Disciplinary and grievance procedures Behfar, K., Mannix, E. And Peterson, R. (2011) Conflict in small groups: the meaning and consequences of process conflict. Small Group Research. Vol 42, No 2, April. pp127176 Bennett, T. (2014) The role of workplace mediation: a critical assessment. Personnel Review. Vol 43, No 5. pp76477 Conway, N. And Briner, R. (2005) Understanding psychological contracts at work: a critical evaluation of theory and research. Oxford: Oxford University Press Cully, M., Woodland, S., OReilly, A., and Dix, G. (1999), Britain at Work, London, Routledge. Davies, P and Freedland, M. (2007) Towards a Flexible Labour Market: Labour Legislation and Regulation since the 1990s, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Gibbons, M. (2007) Better Dispute Resolution. A review of employment dispute resolution in Great Britain. London, Dti. Gibbons, M. (2007) Better dispute resolution: a review of employment dispute resolution in Great Britain. London: Department of Trade and Industry. Kelly, J. (1998), Rethinking Industrial Relations, London, Routledge. Law Society (2008), Draft ACAS Code of Practice on discipline and grievance. Response to the consultation Lewis, R. and Simpson, B. (1981) Striking a Balance? Employment Law after the 1980 Act, Oxford, Martin Robinson Chartered Institute Of Personnel And Development. (2013) Real-life leaders: closing the knowingdoing gap [online]. Research report. London: CIPD.