Disciplinary templates toolkit

Disciplinary procedures are a set way for an employer to deal with disciplinary issues. For example, a manager may be concerned about an employee's work, their general conduct or an unauthorised absence.

Disciplinary procedures are an aid to effective management, to be used primarily as a means of modifying people’s behaviour in line with the organisation’s aims – not just as a mechanism for imposing sanctions. If disciplinary rules and procedures are written correctly and used effectively, not only should the work place be a happier working environment but will minimise the potential of being taken to an Employment Tribunal.

• All workers must have a written statement of terms and conditions of employment that includes disciplinary rules and processes, or the employee must be directed to another conveniently available document that includes those rules and procedures.

• With a quiet word, many disciplinary concerns may be settled informally. However, if an informal resolution is not possible, a disciplinary procedure will be established to address the matter.

• Before dismissal, most disciplinary procedures provide for verbal, written, and final warnings. However, certain behaviour may be deemed as so serious that it will be regarded as gross misconduct and will often justify summary dismissal (without warnings or notice).

• The facts of the case must be thoroughly scrutinised before convening a disciplinary hearing and deciding on the appropriate sentence in every individual situation. The more severe the issue, the more thorough the investigation should be.

• No disciplinary action should be taken until the employee has given his or her side of the story.

• An employee who receives disciplinary action should always have the option to appeal the decision.

Navigating Disciplinary processes correctly is crucial.

Recent UK case law has highlighted key aspects of good Disciplinary management. Knowing how courts have handled claims can help you assess whether your proposed actions are likely to be seen as reasonable.

Here are some notable rulings and their implications:

• Ramphal v Department for Transport (2019): 

  Facts: In this case, Mr. Ramphal was dismissed for misconduct related to expenses claims.

  Outcome: The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled that HR's involvement in the disciplinary process should be limited to advice on procedure and law. The EAT found that HR had improperly influenced the disciplinary officer's decision by making significant changes to the officer's initial findings.

  Key takeaway: This case underscores the importance of maintaining the independence of the disciplinary officer and restricting HR’s role to advisory functions.

• Khan v Stripestar Ltd (2020): 

  Facts: Mr. Khan was dismissed after a brief disciplinary hearing. During the appeal, a thorough investigation was conducted, but the dismissal was upheld.

  Outcome: The EAT found that the appeal process had rectified the initial procedural flaws, rendering the overall process fair.

  Key takeaway: This case highlighted the role of appeals in correcting procedural defects in the initial disciplinary process. This emphasises that a comprehensive appeal can salvage a flawed initial disciplinary process.

• Collins v ILC Manchester Ltd (2021): 

  Facts: Mr. Collins was dismissed after a disciplinary meeting to which he was denied the opportunity to bring a companion.

  Outcome: The Tribunal upheld his claim, awarding compensation. The Employment Tribunal ruled that employees have the right to be accompanied at disciplinary hearings, even during the probationary period.

  Key takeaway: Tthe right to accompaniment applies irrespective of the probationary status.

• University of Dundee v Chakraborty (2022): The EAT dealt with the disclosure of grievance investigation reports.

  Facts: The University amended an investigation report after receiving legal advice but did not disclose the original version.

  Outcome: The Tribunal ruled that the original report should be disclosed, as it was not covered by legal advice privilege at the time of its creation.

  Key takeaway: This case highlights the importance of transparency in disciplinary and grievance investigations.

• Jafri v Lincoln College (2019) 

  Facts: Mr. Jafri was dismissed following allegations of misconduct.

  Outcome: The EAT found that the dismissal was unfair due to a lack of a fair investigation. The investigation was deemed biased and insufficiently thorough.

  Key takeaway:  This case reinforces the need for impartial and comprehensive investigations in disciplinary processes to ensure fairness.

Here are some conplex but common Disciplinary-related workplace scenarios that need careful planning and execution to resolve.

We show you the steps to take to manage the specific case, along with what you should consider doing to minimise and mitigate any repeat.

🔒 To access the answers to the following questions you will need to make a purchase.