Human Resources Division

Management guidance

Dealing with difficult situations and complaints

General

While the procedure is designed to enable the concerns of members of the University community to be addressed, the onus should not be on the individual only to make a complaint. In order to fulfil the University's duty of care to staff and other members of the University community it is essential that potential episodes of this nature are not ignored. If the University becomes aware of the existence of behaviour which could be seen as bullying or harassment (for instance if it is known to a member of staff in a position of authority or with a pastoral role, or to a colleague), it is important to discuss the issues with the HR Consultant/HR Officer assigned to the institution before taking any action.

The advice given to members of staff and students suggests three distinct ways of addressing any problems they encounter relating to inappropriate behaviour of others, including behaviour defined as bullying or harassment. While these three approaches (personal action by the complainant, informal resolution with support, and formal complaint) are suggested as appropriate there is no requirement to follow each stage in sequence.

Procedural considerations

The Head of Institution is the person ultimately accountable for dealing with staffing difficulties, but responsibility for managing aspects of the situation should be delegated. The Head of Institution will then be in a position to receive reports and recommendations following formal or informal procedures and take necessary action without his/her independence having been compromised.

It is important that the HR Consultant/HR Officer assigned to the complainant's institution should be consulted at an early stage.

Resolving a difficulty may involve several stages, and it is not appropriate for the same individual to manage all stages.
Confidentiality is vital in situations involving interpersonal difficulties. Details of the limits of confidentiality are set out in a separate note.
It is important that the principles of natural justice are observed. In this context this means that if allegations are made against a person s/he should be fully informed of those allegations and be able to respond to them before any judgement is made. This applies explicitly to a formal investigation, but should be borne in mind in any informal attempts at resolution. In some exceptional circumstances, it may be appropriate not to identify the complainant or a witness. If this should potentially be the case, the Human Resources Division should be consulted.
Following any investigation or informal process it is important that both parties are informed of the outcome, i.e. told whether or not the complaint has been upheld and within the boundaries of maintaining confidentiality what has been done to attempt to resolve the problem. It is not, however, appropriate to disclose to one party information about disciplinary or other action which may be taken in relation to the other party.
Where, because of particular circumstances, it would be inappropriate for the Head of Institution to take part in the process, the matter should be referred to the Director of Human Resources who will ask the Chairman of the Council of the School, or in Council Institutions the Registrary, to initiate action.
It is important to keep full records and notes but also to observe data protection principles. The Human Resources Division should be consulted about the filing and retention of such records and notes.

Personal action by the complainant

This guidance does not address the first approach listed, personal action by the complainant, as by its nature the approach would not form part of any formal procedure, nor would management be expected to be made aware or otherwise involved.

If, however, there is notification of a situation that has been resolved by personal action, any resultant agreed action will need to be taken and the ongoing situation will need to be monitored.

Both the other approaches require interventions by the institution at the request of the complainant.

Informal resolution with the support of the Head of Institution, manager, supervisor, departmental administrator, or conciliator nominated by the Human Resources Division

If an informal resolution is sought it may be possible for the Head of Institution, manager, supervisor or administrator, with the support of the HR Consultant/HR Officer to take steps to improve relationships, for instance:

without being intrusive, giving individuals the opportunity to raise any concerns
where there is a perception that a member of staff may be behaving inappropriately, discussing with that individual the behaviour and its likely impact on others
facilitating the development or restoration of good working relationships
taking steps to reduce the likelihood of interpersonal friction (without victimising anyone).

This approach can be relatively unstructured. As a minimum it would involve giving both parties the opportunity to express their points of view, perhaps initially by discussing them with the conciliator, but subsequently by meeting and talking openly with either or each of the parties about the difficulties experienced and the changes needed in order for the parties to work together amicably and without stress. It is more likely to be workable if relationships are not strained to breaking point.

Where this is not feasible, the procedure provides for the appointment of a conciliator, who will be a member of staff specifically trained for this function, to work with both parties towards a resolution and an agreement. In particularly difficult circumstances it may be necessary to arrange for professional mediation. Either process requires the agreement of both parties; and it is understood that either party can withdraw from the process at any stage.

In attempting to achieve an informal resolution there are a number of points which need to be borne in mind:

Interpersonal issues need to be dealt with quickly; the longer they are ignored, the more difficult it will be to resolve them.
If not resolved, such issues may have more than a trivial impact on the health, and the work, of those involved.
The person involved in assisting an informal resolution should, during the process, try not to make a judgement as to which party is 'right' or 'wrong'. It is important to treat both parties with respect and to acknowledge the distress that either or both parties may feel.
It is important to seek the advice of the HR Consultant/HR Officer assigned to the institution before taking action.

If reconciliation is not possible (especially where there is no clear evidence of fault on either side) it may be appropriate to consider changing working arrangements. However, such changes should only be made with the consent of each party or, if that is not possible, then both should be treated even-handedly.

As part of, or following a reconciliation process which may not have been totally successful, there may be ways in which practical arrangements can be made to reduce stress (e.g. revising room allocations in order to reduce friction between the parties) but without victimising anyone. Any such arrangements need to be discussed with the parties concerned and, if possible, agreed and implemented as a supportive not a punitive process. It is important that in making arrangements there should be no inappropriate attribution of guilt. It is also important to bear in mind that such arrangements may not always effect a resolution, as they may leave the real problem unaddressed.

Formal action

Should it prove impossible to achieve a resolution by any informal means, a complainant may invoke the formal complaint procedure. The formality of this procedure is essential in order adequately to test the evidence and to protect the interests of both the complainant and the person complained against. The application of this level of formality to difficult interpersonal issues requires a sensitive approach. Points to be borne in mind include:

Complaints may be made either to the Head of Institution or Director of Human Resources. The latter is included to provide an alternative route for a complainant who feels unable to deal directly with the Head of Institution.
While it is still possible at the formal complaint stage for steps to be taken towards achieving an informal resolution, the choice of an informal resolution must remain in the hands of the complainant.
Because of the stress which a complaint can cause to both parties, it is vital that the investigation be carried out as speedily as is consistent with adequate gathering of facts.
The complaint is investigated by a senior person who has no connection with either party's institution in order to ensure impartiality. The investigator should not make any prior assumptions about the validity or otherwise of the complaint.
The investigator, on receiving the complaint, will need to consider what further evidence s/he will need, and how the evidence will be tested. Good preparation for interviews should ensure that questioning is adequate to gather the necessary information without being excessive or oppressive.
At the conclusion of the investigation the investigator will report to the Head of Institution on the facts as established. It will then be the responsibility of the Head of Institution, with the support of the Human Resources Division, to decide what action to take.
One possible action which the Head of Institution may take is to invoke the disciplinary procedure either where the complaint is upheld and the behaviour complained of is serious, or where the complaint is not upheld and found to be malicious or vexatious. While ideally a resolution should aim to restore good working relationships, where the behaviour complained of is damaging to the complainant, disciplinary action even to the point of dismissal may be the only way of protecting the complainant and others who may subsequently be affected. In this situation, any action necessary should be taken irrespective of status.