“I want to make a complaint” is never a phrase we relish hearing, and it can be all too jarring to hear it from the mouths of our own staff. But that is essentially what a grievance is – a complaint about the working environment.

So how do you as a manager deal with grievances? Should it be informal, or should it be formal? Does it link in with other HR policies you have in place?

What do you do when relationships are fraught and grievances are flying in from all sides?!

Robyn Clark (aka JacksonR) and Susi O’Brien (HR Help advisor) hosted our lunchtime HR Clinic which focused on managing grievances.

Here is a summary of the questions we received, and the answers given.

What’s the difference between a complaint, a grievance and whistleblowing?

In HR terms, a grievance is more formal than a complaint. We probably complain all the time about various things – “Steve never puts the toilet seat back down”, “Debbie never washes up her cup”, “The printer isn’t working properly”, etc. A complaint can be oral or written and can relate to anything. A grievance is a formal complaint made by an employee towards an employer within the workplace – for example, “Steve is treating me less favourably than other staff”, “The new policy about remote working disadvantages me”, or “I haven’t been paid for the overtime I worked over the last month”. Whistleblowing is wider than that; this is when someone raises a concern – either internally or externally – about wrongdoing, risk or malpractice that affects others. For example, this could be concerns over clinical safety or misuse of public funds.

How to deal with those unofficial grievances – for example, when someone tells you about their complaint or the treatment they’re receiving from another colleague, but they don’t want you to take it further. “It’s just to make you aware.”

How thoughtful of them!

I’d do just that, though – “Okay, you’ve made me aware”. But then I’d be clear that I cannot act if they don’t want me to, and if I haven’t seen anything with my own two eyes or had it reported to me by someone else who is willing to go on record, then all we have is hearsay. So, the staff member “reporting” it needs to be aware that there will be no action taken.

However, if I felt the behaviour being reported was sufficiently serious, I would encourage them to make a more formal report. It might even be that I feel obliged to commence a formal investigation into allegations raised without the employee’s consent to do so. That’s a really difficult situation to be in, but if the alternative is pretending not to be aware of allegations regarding serious misconduct in the workplace, it might be necessary.

What are the proper stages of a grievance?

Ideally, try to deal with all grievances informally in the first instance. See if there’s some kind of mutual agreement that can be reached between the relevant parties. If someone is aggrieved that they were underpaid, seek to rectify it ASAP. If you’ve got a personality conflict, aim to mediate as quicky as possible to resolve it. If any kind of remedial action is obvious to you, do it as quickly as possible to try to stop the grievance escalating.

However, if this isn’t possible, or if the issue is sufficiently serious to make you consider going straight to formal action (for example, obvious bullying or harassment or anything that might constitute gross misconduct), then you should meet the employee to identify their exact concerns and allegations, then start an investigatory process. This will look similar to the process you’d use for a disciplinary investigation – speak to the parties involved, review any evidence, formulate a report and present it to a senior manager or partner for a decision on the right course of action. Remember to be objective and don’t just consult evidence that you think is relevant; give the accused employee the opportunity to suggest anyone they think you should speak to, or any evidence they feel will back them up.

Following the investigation, you need to conclude the grievance process with the employee who raised it. This means holding a formal hearing for which that employee has the right to representation. The chair of the hearing will confirm if the grievance has been upheld, and agree next steps to remedy the situation. The employee has a further right to appeal the grievance outcome if they wish.

If the grievance relates to the behaviour of another employee and is upheld, then you may choose to organise a separate disciplinary process with that accused person, and use the grievance investigation as a basis for this.

The grievance process is enshrined in the ACAS Code of Practice, and failure to follow it properly can lead to a successful claim at tribunal of unfair dismissal. Where the Code is deemed not to have been followed, this can result in an uplift to the amount of compensation so it’s really important to follow it.

How far back can a staff member go when submitting a grievance?

There’s no time limit for raising a grievance internally, though you may need to explain to staff that if they’re talking about events from a long time ago, it will probably be much harder to investigate them and come to clear conclusions.

If an employee wants to lodge a grievance at an employment tribunal, they have three months minus one day from the date that the event that they are complaining about last happened.

How do you resolve personality conflicts between two members of the same team?

This is probably the issue that comes up the most in relation to grievances.

Firstly, you have to consider whether you actually need to do anything at all. People are different and there will always be types of people who don’t rub along well together – but provided the working environment can be civil, and the job gets done, isn’t that enough? We’d all love to have a harmonious team that get along with each other all the time, but it isn’t always possible and sometimes we just have to accept it. This message can be shared with other staff too; provided that the people involved are not actively damaging their working relationship on purpose, sometimes it’s better just to avoid or spend less effort trying to make it work.

If, however, there were negative behaviours that were spilling out into a negative working environment, I would speak to each person individually and flag that I’d noticed some conflict, being specific about how I feel this behaviour is being displayed. I’d ask if they recognised any of what I was saying, and if so, why they thought there might be an issue.

Quite often, you may find both parties refusing to admit there’s a problem (you can lead a horse to water, as the saying goes). If they don’t want to do anything about it, you can’t make them. What you can do is clarify what your expectation of staff behaviour is – refer to your code of conduct or your staff values statement if relevant. Confirm that any behaviour outside what you expect is not acceptable and may result in disciplinary action being taken. Reinforce that we should all aim to work together and support each other, and that building good working relationships is a high priority as a practice.

If one or both parties do recognise there is an issue, then you need to consider how you can resolve this. The best way to do this is through mediation. The point of mediation is to get the two parties together in a safe environment with clear ground rules, and give them the opportunity to air their grievances. Nothing that’s said during mediation can be used against the other person. However, the aim of the mediation is to reach a mutually agreeable outcome or set of actions – so, in this case, it would be to resolve the conflict and agree on a way forward that allows the two staff members to work together.

Hopefully that will work, but I would also reinforce during the process what the expected standards of behaviour for staff are, and the potential repercussions of not following those standards.

One thing I will always recommend is spending some time getting to know your team and encouraging them to get to know each other. I like to do a Myers-Briggs type exercise with my staff whenever I join a new team so I know which personality types I’m working with. But I’m not the only one who needs to know! Many times, when I’ve carried out this exercise in teams and been able to demonstrate how different some personalities are, it has really helped to reduce conflict and give staff an appreciation of other people’s preferences. I would highly recommend it.

How to address problems without singling one person out in particular. I have been sending emails to the team so as not to make any one person feel singled out, but it seems that the staff member has read the email but not taken anything on board. Other staff members have approached me regarding this. HELP!

I think the question I’d put back to you is why are you not singling this person out if they’re the only one who’s at fault? Is it fair to be seen to be admonishing a group of staff when only one is causing the problem, and then – to compound it – isn’t taking any appropriate action? I know we can tend to shy away from situations that may lead to conflict, but if you’re frustrating a whole group of people as opposed to one individual, is this actually helping? My approach – and recommendation – would be to deal with individual problems with the individual involved. You will only lose the confidence of your other staff if you aren’t seen to be dealing with a problem person directly.

Dealing with a grievance involving a whole department against a manager

Now this is trickier! And this is a situation where I’d almost skip straight to a formal process rather than try to tackle it informally – that is, provided the staff involved are willing to report it formally.

As already mentioned, any formal grievance needs to be investigated. So, you need to meet the staff who are raising concerns and take details of their issues. Then you meet the manager involved for their perspective. You should review any other evidence that may be relevant – for example, records, CCTV footage, witness statements, etc. Once your investigation is completed, you should compile your findings into a report and submit it to a senior manager or partner, or whatever setup you have, for a decision on whether any action needs to be taken. You must also, of course, let the team know whether their grievance has been upheld. That doesn’t mean they get to know of any specific actions being taken with the individual manager as a result!

Can we refuse to hear a grievance if we know that it’s time-wasting?

You can refuse to hear a grievance if there’s evidence that it’s being brought in bad faith – but this can be tricky to prove. My advice would always be to hear it. However, the amount of detail you go into will depend on the nature of the grievance. For example, if a staff member submits a grievance against being performance managed, and their only evidence is that they’re being performance managed, and the manager has evidence of poor performance, the grievance is going to be tied up and thrown out quickly. You need to be mindful that you don’t dismiss something that could later turn out to be substantial.

I have an employee on long-term sick. She went off in May 2022 following an investigation into her behaviour and was due to attend a disciplinary hearing which had to be delayed due to the sick leave. She is now, ten months later, claiming bullying and victimisation by me and I’m sure she will raise a grievance at a welfare meeting due to take place in March. Advice on how to deal with this please?

Well, firstly, I’m sorry you find yourself in this position. Sadly, for a lot of staff, their best form of defence is to attack, and as managers, it’s always us who end up on the receiving end.

If she’s going to claim bullying then she needs to make that formal and you should arrange for someone independent to investigate her claim. If you’ve done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to worry about. Quite often, staff accuse managers of bullying when all we’re doing is managing them, and if this is the case, it will become apparent quickly and her claim will be dismissed. Once it has been, then you need to carry on and manage the disciplinary process to its conclusion. As we mentioned in the clinic on disciplinaries, you can continue a process if someone is off sick, so I would advise not letting this drag on for too long.

Can the person raising the grievance see the minutes from any investigatory interviews with other members of staff? Can the grievance be recorded to ensure any minutes produced are correct?

If you’re undertaking a formal process, then the aggrieved employee should be able to have sight of any minutes as part of the hearing process. If the witness has asked to remain anonymous, then you would anonymise the minutes. Anonymous witness statements should only be relied upon as a last resort, but usually only if there are really good reasons for anonymity such as a reasonable threat of reprisals. Generally, if a witness just doesn’t want to have their name shared, then it’s best to try and persuade them otherwise, or just don’t use their evidence as a basis for decision-making. I do warn witnesses that should a case end up in tribunal, they can be called upon legally to attend and their anonymity will not be protected. It’s worth letting people know this in advance.

I would encourage recording meetings and transcribing the minutes after. This was standard practice for me when I supported these types of meetings previously. You do need to obtain consent from all parties before recording, but if you explain that the notes will be transcribed afterwards and shared, people don’t usually decline!

If someone raises a grievance about being bullied and I uphold it, what happens then? Does the bully get the right of appeal against that? Can I give them a disciplinary warning?

Should the investigation into the grievance – or any other grievance which uncovers misconduct – strongly suggest that misconduct has taken place, then you should finish the grievance process via the usual grievance hearing, and then start a separate process for disciplinary. You would write to the accused and explain that the investigation into the grievance has shown that there may be a case to answer under the practice’s disciplinary policy – and cite which part of the policy/code of conduct you are referring to. A hearing would need to be arranged and a report compiled of the findings of the grievance investigation. At the disciplinary hearing, formal sanctions can be given if the behaviours demonstrated are viewed as misconduct. The disciplinary process, of course, includes a right of appeal. So, whilst the accused person can’t appeal another employee’s grievance, they do get full opportunity to put their perspective across during the separate disciplinary process, and have their right of appeal as part of that.

Should you facilitate colleagues not working together who are having the issue? If mediation fails, where do you go from there?

I’m not a fan of separating people who don’t get along – this is not school and I’m not a teacher! I would go back to the practice’s code of conduct or values statement and reinforce that staff are not expected to necessarily like each other, but they must act professionally towards each other and not behave in any way that would contravene that code or those values.

If mediation has been attempted but doesn’t appear to have worked, then all you have to fall back on is your disciplinary policy. They must behave appropriately towards each other. Any incidents of negative behaviour will be treated as a disciplinary offence. I’d also reinforce that you’re not there to take sides and if they are adamant they cannot work together, then they should consider resigning. Sounds harsh, but it is fair! And sometimes when it’s made clear that you won’t get drawn into these issues, they often resolve themselves!

What do you do when someone keeps on submitting grievances? We have someone on their third in less than two years.

Wow! Firstly, it depends on whether they’re submitting grievances about the same thing. If so, you can simply refuse to hear any more once a full investigation has been completed.

However, if they’re constantly submitting new ones, then I’d be keen to speak to them about this behaviour. Is it indicative of a bigger problem? Could it be that there has been a breakdown in relationship? Could mediation help to solve the problem – or at least give you the option to agree actions on how to deal with issues that arise in the future? And give you the opportunity to explain the impact of receiving them so frequently.

If you feel the grievances are vexatious – or are repeating issues that you feel have already been addressed – then you do have recourse to disciplinary action against the employee, but this should only really be used in the most extreme cases.

Should our grievance policy apply to staff in probation, or is it like disciplinary and you don’t apply it until they’ve passed?

Firstly, please don’t tell me that you don’t apply your disciplinary policy in the same way to staff in probation – I’m not a fan of that at all. Whilst employees in probation may be subject to a shortened process, you should still follow the ACAS Code, in my view, as you never know when a staff member could be hiding behind a statutory right or a protected characteristic. Better to be safe than sorry is always my motto!

All staff should be able to access your grievance policy and procedure regardless of their length of service. Considering that a grievance could be raised for discriminatory behaviour – which requires no length of service to give the staff member protection – you would be compounding that discrimination by not allowing them to raise one. So, put simply, it should apply to all staff and include those on bank contracts as well.

Can someone raise a grievance about wanting to be paid more?

Ah, wouldn’t we all?!

But yes, of course they can. Employees can submit grievances about almost anything, provided they feel genuinely aggrieved about the issue. I mean, ideally the employee will have asked for a pay rise before going straight down the grievance route! But if the request has been refused, and they feel unreasonably so, they’re entitled to raise one. Gender pay claims are also almost always raised as grievances initially, for example.

Can a staff member put in a grievance against a patient (e.g., for alleged harassment)?

Yes. It may sound weird but, in this scenario, the employee is looking to you, the employer, to do something to protect them from this behaviour. And, as an employer, we have an obligation to maintain the health and safety of our employees – so the onus is on us to act. You obviously wouldn’t bring a patient to a grievance hearing as they’re not employed by you and it would just be strange. This is where our zero tolerance policy comes in; we have the right to issue patients with warnings, behaviour contracts or even to remove them from our lists for this sort of behaviour.

Do you have any tips for keeping grievances to a minimum?

Yes!

I’ll go straight back to the personality type exercise for one – most grievances relate to interpersonal working relationships, and encouraging our teams to respect and value each other’s differences is really key in this.

I’d also recommend ensuring your practice has a good values statement that everyone can sign up to. Having this, along with a clear vision and mission, creates a culture – and cultures help to bond us together. If everyone is on the same page and wants the same thing, then it makes it easier to work harmoniously together. Take every opportunity you can to embed that culture – through team-building events, branding, reviewing your values in meetings, and use these values in recruitment exercises.

The two other things I would recommend highly are good employment practices, and communication and engagement.

If you’re a good employer, you don’t break the law, and you seek to maintain a happy, healthy working environment, then people shouldn’t have anything to complain about.

And staff are happiest when they know what’s going on and they feel a part of it. So, regular communication with your team – and involving them early on when it comes to any changes – is a really easy way of keeping happiness levels up!

Do you have any good examples of a staff code of conduct please?

Normally, you would find this in your disciplinary policy. We do have a Code of personal conduct [PLUS] document available..

What personality system did you use to see the team dynamics?

I used the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) system. You can access a version of it for free via www.16personalities.com. I had all of my team complete the questionnaire and then we had a team session on what we felt were our strengths and weaknesses, how our personality type lends itself to the job we do, and what our communication preferences are. It helps people understand that everyone is different, and just because a person acts in a certain way, it doesn’t mean there’s a negative intention. I’ve always found it has helped to build bonds.

Is it sufficient to record the meetings and hold them on file, without transcribing the notes?

It depends on the circumstances, but given that the employee has a right to access them under SAR, and they may end up forming part of a report on the grievance investigation itself, I would always recommend transcribing them.

An exception might be if you’ve had a meeting which has successfully concluded the whole grievance process, everyone is happy, and you’re not expecting an appeal. In that case you might choose to just keep the recording without transcribing it, so long as your written outcome to the employee following the meeting already includes everything you’d expect they’d need to know.

What if they cite their mental health is higher when working with a particular colleague?

As I’ve mentioned before, I’m not a fan of moving a problem around. Can you guarantee that the two people will never have to work together, and their issues won’t spill out and impact the wider team? I think it would be really rare if you could. And so, for me, the issues need to be dealt with. If one person feels their colleague is negatively impacting their mental health, but the grievance investigation doesn’t find any evidence that the accused colleague is doing anything unreasonable, then the grievance probably won’t be upheld. At that point, you need to consider what if any other type of support you can offer the original staff member with their mental health, and there might be a capability issue going on there. The staff member may also want to consider their own future working within the practice – though that is of course their own personal decision.

I was asked by a colleague who was involved in a grievance for being a bully, and it wasn’t upheld, can the other staff member sue them personally?

In this situation, I assume you mean can the accused person, found to be not guilty, sue the accuser for defamation or slander? Essentially, anyone can try to sue anyone else for any reason – whether it’s likely to succeed is another matter, and at what personal cost to the claimant? If they felt the grievance was submitted in bad faith, they could raise a grievance of their own against the initial accuser for raising a malicious complaint, which would then have to go through its own grievance process.

Another point to remember is that under discrimination law, a claimant can sue both their employer AND individuals who work for it, such as their manager. This can be a stressful experience for everyone.

What if a party doesn’t want to have the mediation meeting with the colleague that they are having the issue with? Cited due to mental health as it’s too stressful.

As we’ve said, when it comes to mediation, you cannot force either party to engage. They both have to agree to it. So, if one party will not, then all you can do is enforce the expectations of behaviour and remind the staff of the consequences of not meeting those expectations. I would try to reassure the staff member about the ground rules of mediation and the aim of it being to seek resolution – but you can only lead a horse to water!

As you have mentioned, going through a grievance process is very time-consuming. I have personally had three allegations of bullying, for staff who have left, which have not amounted to anything. I have followed the procedure but I can’t help but feel that they are petty allegations (they didn’t get their own way). Is there a different way of tackling this rather than going through the process again each time? When you save evidence, what if it’s their word against mine?

Let’s break this one down a bit.

Yes, you have to go through the full process every time – remember that grievances must be dealt with according to the ACAS Code of Practice so you need to ensure that everything is done properly.

I would encourage anyone who has had a grievance raised against them regarding their own behaviour to reflect on the grievance and see if there’s any personal learning that you can take from it. Even if the grievance is not upheld, it’s worth some reflection to see if anything could have been done to prevent the grievance being raised in the first place.

If three allegations of bullying occur in the same practice within a short space of time, it sounds like something is not working right. It might not be bullying (it might even be a training or recruitment issue?) but it does need to be looked into and considered carefully.

Finally, one person’s word against another is generally hearsay. It’s important to make a decision based on evidence, and given your example, I would be highlighting the rejected request as a potential reason for the grievance being raised. That would act as evidence in the absence of anything else.

Links to useful documents

• Disciplinary policy and procedure [PLUS]
• Grievance policy and procedure [PLUS]
• Grievance notification of appeal hearing [PLUS]
• Grievance notification of formal hearing [PLUS]
• Grievance notification appeal outcome [PLUS]
• Removal of patients policy [PLUS]
• Visions, values and accountability [PLUS]
• Dealing with unreasonable, violent and abusive patients policy [PLUS]
• Bullying and harassment policy (England) [PLUS]
• Whistleblowing policy and procedure [PLUS]

Our HR Masterclass includes a module covering all aspects of handling grievances, as well as modules on other important topics, including recruitment, managing long-term absence, managing short-term absence, performance management and managing conduct and disciplinaries.

The HR Masterclass is an online course delivered in the HUB. For existing Practice Index Learning subscribers, this module is now available in your course list. 

If you do not have a subscription to Practice Index Learning and you would like further information or would like to sign up, click here.

We are looking to host HR clinics on a number of topics. Do let us know in the comments what other topics you’d like to see covered in future sessions.