Confidentiality of hearings

[green_and_mean]

I have attended a few disciplinary hearings as a 'friend' of the accused and they always state 'you cannot discuss this matter with anyone'. Is this true? It seems a bit odd that you cannot seek advice or gather evidence from witnesses particularly as they threaten gross misconduct if they find out the accused has disclosed anything that happened in their own hearing. Surely the only duty of holding a confidence lies with those conducting the hearing not the accused?

[Emmzzi]

surely witnesses have a right not to be intimidated by the accused trying to bully them into keeping quiet...

 

best of the neutral party asks all the questions

[green_and_mean]

Its a disciplinary, who is neutral? Why should the employer be able to speak to people and gather evidence against the accused but the accused just sit by and do nothing? Why would you assume the employee is a bully and not the employer.....very odd attitude?

[Emmzzi]

the investigating officer is the neutral party. You asked, I'm explaining the logic. It's about witness nobbling.

[green_and_mean]

In one scenario the line manager investigating claimed witness 'a' had made a statement in the favour of the employer ie the alledged offence happened, having spoken to the witness informally she has made it clear no such statement was made. If the employee now comes forward and says that the witness has denied making such a statement, it has been made clear that speaking to any witnesses is gross misconduct and they will be guilty of the new offence. That hardly seems fair in Court you are free to challenge any evidence.

[steampowered]

Its a difficult situation, I can see the problem. It may be better just to focus on whether or not the misconduct was committed, rather than on whether the evidence is there. Going down a he-said she-said route is not particularly convincing for the person who is conducting the investigation.

 

Remember that it is pretty common for people to say entirely different things depending on who is asking. The witness may well have said one thing to the employer and another thing to your friend. Similarly it is quite easy for people's statements to be misunderstood when one has only a partial understanding of the facts. It is sensible to ask questions in the investigation meeting about what exactly people have said and what exactly the accusations are.

[becky2585]

Yes, it's perfectly normal for the disciplinary process to be kept confidential.

 

If the accused employee thinks that an employee might have evidence which is beneficial to them, they should tell the investigating officer to interview them for a statement.

[green_and_mean]

I agree that the person carrying out the investigation has a duty of confidentiality as do any persons interviewed once the allegation has been revealed to them. What I am having trouble with is the duty of the accused not to discuss the matter. If for example today I got letter stating I was going to be disciplined for being late and as a result became upset and was asked by a close colleague if I was ok, I could not tell them the reason I was upset despite the fact it was me being disciplined? Looking at their 'rules' if I even told my wife it would be taken as misconduct as it states 'do not reveal the contents of this case to ANYONE'? If I was to tell my line manager I had HIV or a criminal record for example they have a duty of confidentiality to keep the fact 'secret' however I would not be in breach of confidence if I told a colleague myself, so surely the same would apply here? It is quite common for high profile cases of misconduct to be in the press, surely that is a breach of confidence? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24552905 .....for example? It would be clear to any of his colleagues who the un-named driver was and therefore a breach of confidence surely. It seems rather perverse that the employer can tell the press he has been dismissed but he could not reveal he hadn't been if the reverse outcome was the result.

[becky2585]

In the case you mention, the driver had already been dismissed so confidentiality didn't really apply. It's more for whilst the investigation is ongoing.

 

You should be able to discuss matters with friends and family, but not with work colleagues.