Page 30 - BOSS Today Issue 29

HR

FACE OFF

Is your disciplinary policy fit for purpose in the 21 century?
st

n the recent scandal employee dismissed for considering disciplinary action, should communicate any
Iinvolving Lord Sewel’s remarking that his work was a the focus must be on whether changes made, and it is
behaviour when not in the “shambles” and another who the employee’s conduct good practice to publicise
House of Lords, the peer waited was dismissed for naming his directly affects the employer’s the amendments via an
several days before resigning, employer and stating that he reputation, but the position email to staff or an intranet
following the media frenzy. couldn’t “wait to leave because the employee holds in the announcement. Employees
The incident may have caused it’s s**t”. Such derogatory organisation is also relevant. should be provided with a copy
employers to question whether descriptions do little to The modern day workplace of the revised policy or told
their own disciplinary policies enhance an organisation’s is constantly evolving. To where they can readily access it.
cover an employee’s activities reputation, but employers do ensure that they keep pace
outside work, including where need to be careful. A dismissal with technological change, Policy Changes
this brings the organisation into in the case Whitham v Club 24 employers should review their Organisations also need to
disrepute. was held to be unfair because disciplinary policy every 6-12 remember to publicise the
‘Bringing the employer into the derogatory comment months to avoid missing any amendments to those who
disrepute’ usually means the posted on Facebook was relevant developments. They are absent or returning from
employee acting in a way relatively mild and there was should also make sure the long-term absence. Employers
which is incompatible with no evidence of any actual or policy states that the examples should ask staff for a written
the employer’s public profile likely harm to the relationship of gross misconduct listed are acknowledgment that they
or values, or doing something between the employer and its ‘non-exhaustive’ and that the have read and understood
which would ordinarily be clients. policy may be modified from the revised policy, even if the
regarded as offensive: for time to time. amendment is relatively minor.
example, sexual misconduct or Disciplinary Action It is possible to ‘future-proof’ Where the changes are more
drug-taking, which reflect badly What if an employee has been policies by referring not only extensive, employers could
on the employer by association. involved in an activity outside to current named technologies provide an accompanying
However, behaviour which of work which is contrary to such as Facebook and LinkedIn, explanatory note or offer
could bring an employer into the employer’s values but but also by including terms further explanation in person if
disrepute in one industry, or which is not directly linked to such as ‘other social and required.
from one particular employee, the employer as such? The law professional networking media’. Employers with contractual
may not be classed as such firm Clifford Chance took no The policy should make it clear policies will need to take
in others. Nevertheless, it is action against one of its trainee that bringing the employer into extra care and consult with
generally not a good idea solicitors who had uploaded a disrepute includes comments employees before making any
for any employee to make video of himself blaming the made via social and professional changes.
derogatory statements about Paris Charlie Hebdo terrorist networking media and covers Why not speak to your BOSS
their employer in the public attack on non-Muslims, stating activities both inside and HR Adviser and arrange an
domain, including on social that the views expressed were outside work. HR Health Check, which would
media. ‘personal’ and not those of Most disciplinary policies include a review of your current
There have been numerous the firm. However, the firm’s will be ‘non-contractual’ – this processes and procedures?
dismissals in recent years response may have been enables employers to make
because of comments made different if the video had changes to the policy without n FOR MORE INFORMATION
on Facebook, including one been made by a more senior the need for consultation with PLEASE CONTACT YOUR HR
involving a long-serving individual. If an employer is staff. However, employers ADVISER ON 0845 450 1565

30 BOSS TODAY | September/October 2015

BOSS issue 29 p30-p31.indd 2 08/09/2015 11:47