Dismissals – To What Extent Should HR be Involved?

Book your free initial call

    We endeavour to make an initial response to all enquiries within 24 hours but please be aware that on some occasions due to prior commitments or volume of calls we will not be able to respond in that time frame. We also operate a 48 hour return policy. This return policy means that if we have not responded with 48 hours of your initial enquiry we are unable to do so due to current workloads and we will destroy your data accordingly. This policy ensures you are not left waiting and have the certainty that your data is not compromised. In most instances however we are able to make contact within a 24 hour time frame. Please note our free initial advice service is available to clients at our total discretion and if your case is of a complex nature we may not be able to offer you a free consultation. However in these instances we will advise you what the charge would be for an initial fixed fee consultation.
  • (view our privacy statement)
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

It is of course well established practice that a disciplinary officer can seek advice from HR on the matter. How much of an influence that advice can have is of course normally only known between the person giving the advice and the recipient of it. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has recently given guidance in the case of Ramphal v Department for Transport as to the extent to which HR should be involved.

In this case, the issue was whether the HR officer had lobbied the dismissing officer as to the Claimant’s culpability and influenced the sanction given. The Employment Judge in the first instance said there was no undue influence but the EAT said that there was evidence to the contrary and the conclusions the Judge had drawn had not been clearly explained. The EAT held that any advice from HR should be around the legal issues and the procedure and not stray into culpability saying that:

an employee facing disciplinary charges and a dismissal procedure is entitled to assume that the decision will be taken by the appropriate officer, without having been lobbied by other parties as to the findings he should make as to culpability…..and also given notice of representations made by others to the Dismissing Officer that go beyond legal advice, and advice on matter of process and procedure.”

Employers should consider the remit of HR in each case and ensure that the disciplining officer has reached his/her own conclusions on guilt and is prepared to defend that decision in an Employment Tribunal if necessary.

Written by
Edward Aston
24th September 2015