Managing Employees

Managing employees effectively requires clear expectations, capable managers and a consistent approach to performance, conduct, attendance and workplace relationships. Employers need to address issues early, understand the facts and individual circumstances, and recognise when ordinary management should give way to a formal HR process.
Everyday management decisions can also carry employment law risk. Disability, discrimination, whistleblowing, pregnancy, family-related rights, contractual issues and other protected circumstances may affect how an employee should be managed. A structured, well-documented approach helps employers make defensible decisions, reduce escalation and support stronger workforce management.

What this article is about

This guide explains how employers can manage employees throughout the employment relationship, from setting expectations, onboarding and day-to-day management through to performance, conduct, sickness absence, workplace concerns, organisational change and employee exits. It also considers fairness and consistency, documentation, the role of line managers, employment law risk, when formal HR procedures are required and when specialist advice may be appropriate.

Section A: What Does Managing Employees Involve?

Managing employees involves overseeing the employment relationship in a way that enables individuals to perform their roles effectively while protecting the organisation's operational and legal interests. It extends from everyday communication and supervision through to dealing with more complex issues involving performance, conduct, absence, workplace relationships and organisational change.

For employers, effective employee management usually depends on three elements working together: clear organisational expectations, capable line management and appropriate HR support. Policies and procedures provide an important framework, but they cannot anticipate every situation that may arise. Managers still need to exercise judgement, communicate effectively and recognise when an issue requires escalation.

1. Day-to-Day Management and Formal HR Processes

A useful distinction is between ordinary employee management and formal HR procedures.

Most employment relationships are managed through routine interactions between employees and their managers. These may include setting objectives, allocating work, reviewing performance, providing feedback, discussing attendance, resolving minor disagreements and responding to changes in workload or business priorities.

Not every concern needs to become a formal HR matter. In many cases, early and constructive management can resolve an issue before formal action becomes necessary. For example, an employee who has misunderstood an expected standard may simply need clearer instructions, additional support or feedback.

There are, however, circumstances where informal management is insufficient or inappropriate. Repeated underperformance, allegations of misconduct, serious workplace complaints, prolonged absence or circumstances that could potentially result in dismissal may require a structured HR process.

Employers therefore need to be able to recognise the point at which an issue should move from ordinary management into a formal procedure.

2. The Employer's Role

The employer is ultimately responsible for the systems within which employees are managed. This includes establishing appropriate employment terms, workplace policies, reporting structures and procedures for dealing with employee issues.

Employers should also ensure managers understand the extent of their authority and when matters need to be referred to HR or senior management.

This is particularly important where managers are making decisions that could affect an employee's employment status, pay, contractual rights or future with the organisation. Poorly handled conversations or unauthorised commitments can create problems even where the employer later attempts to correct the position.

The organisation should therefore have clear lines of responsibility for managing employees and escalating higher-risk decisions.

3. The Role of Line Managers

Line managers are usually the first people to identify changes in employee performance, attendance, behaviour or workplace relationships.

Their role is not simply to identify problems. Effective managers should set expectations, provide feedback, support employees in performing their roles and address concerns promptly when standards are not being met.

Managers also need to understand the limits of informal management. An apparently straightforward conversation can become more significant if an employee raises a health condition, alleges discrimination, makes a complaint about another employee or suggests they have raised concerns about wrongdoing.

Managers do not necessarily need to become employment law specialists, but they should be trained to recognise situations requiring HR involvement or specialist advice.

4. The Role of HR

HR provides the organisational framework and professional support needed to manage employment issues consistently.

Depending on the size and structure of the organisation, HR's role may include developing policies, advising managers, maintaining employment records, supporting investigations, overseeing formal procedures and helping decision-makers assess employment risk.

HR can also provide an important degree of separation between the manager directly involved in an issue and the organisation's wider decision-making process.

For smaller organisations without an internal HR function, these responsibilities may fall to business owners or senior managers, increasing the importance of having access to external HR advice when more difficult situations arise.

5. Managing Employees Across the Employment Relationship

Employee management is continuous rather than something that begins when a problem occurs.

At the start of employment, the focus may be on induction, probation, establishing responsibilities and communicating performance expectations.

During employment, managers need to monitor performance, attendance and conduct while supporting development and responding to changing circumstances.

Where problems arise, the focus shifts towards identifying the issue, understanding its cause and deciding what intervention is appropriate.

Organisational changes may also require employees to be managed through changes to duties, working arrangements, reporting structures or potentially redundancy.

Finally, where the employment relationship ends, employers need to manage the exit appropriately, whether this results from resignation, dismissal, redundancy, settlement or another reason.

Managing employees effectively therefore requires employers to think about the entire employment relationship rather than treating individual HR problems in isolation.

6. Balancing People Management With Employment Risk

Employers are entitled to manage their workforce and require employees to meet reasonable standards of performance, attendance and conduct. The existence of employment law protections does not prevent legitimate management action.

The risk lies in taking action without properly understanding the circumstances.

For example, what initially appears to be poor performance may be connected with a health condition. Attendance concerns may involve disability, pregnancy or family-related rights. A complaint about management may potentially amount to a grievance or protected disclosure. A conduct issue may require investigation before any conclusions can safely be reached.

Good employee management therefore involves both operational decision-making and risk recognition.

The objective should not be to make every management decision excessively formal. It is to ensure that managers know when they can deal with an issue routinely and when the circumstances require a more structured, documented or specialist approach.

 

 

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section B: Building the Foundations for Effective Employee Management

Effective employee management is easier where the organisation has established clear expectations, responsibilities and workplace standards before problems arise.

Many employee disputes become difficult because the underlying expectations were never sufficiently clear. An employee may believe they are performing adequately while their manager has different expectations. Managers may apply different standards across teams. Policies may exist but employees may not know about them or understand how they operate.

Employers should therefore create a practical management framework that gives employees clarity about what is expected and gives managers the structure needed to respond when those expectations are not met.

1. Clear Employment Terms

The employment contract provides an important foundation for the employment relationship.

Depending on the role and arrangements, contractual terms may address matters such as:

• job duties;
• working hours;
• place of work;
• pay;
• benefits;
• notice;
• confidentiality;
• mobility;
• flexibility; and
• other employment obligations.

Employers should ensure that contractual documentation accurately reflects the intended employment arrangements and that significant changes are dealt with appropriately.

Managers should also understand that the practical employment relationship matters. If working arrangements evolve substantially over time, the employer should not simply assume that an old contractual document provides a complete answer to every management question.

2. Clear Roles and Responsibilities

Employees need to understand what their role involves and what standards they are expected to achieve.

Job descriptions can help define responsibilities, but effective role management usually requires more than providing a document when the employee starts work.

Managers should communicate:

• the employee's principal responsibilities;
• current priorities;
• expected standards;
• relevant objectives or targets;
• decision-making authority;
• reporting responsibilities; and
• how performance will be assessed.

Where roles change, expectations should be updated accordingly.

This is particularly important when managing performance. Before concluding that an employee has failed to meet expectations, the employer should be able to identify what the expected standard was and whether it had been communicated sufficiently clearly.

3. Workplace Policies

Workplace policies provide a common framework for employees and managers.

Depending on the organisation, relevant policies may include:

• disciplinary procedures;
• grievance procedures;
• sickness absence;
• equality, diversity and inclusion;
• bullying and harassment;
• flexible working;
• family-related leave;
• whistleblowing;
• IT and communications;
• social media;
• data protection;
• health and safety; and
• remote or hybrid working.

Having policies is not enough. They should be current, accessible and communicated to employees and managers.

Managers should also understand how the policies operate in practice. A detailed disciplinary procedure provides little protection if managers ignore it when a conduct issue arises.

Where disciplinary and grievance matters become formal, employers should also take account of the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. Employment Tribunals can take compliance with the Code into account in relevant cases, and an unreasonable failure to comply can affect compensation by up to 25%.

4. Employee Handbooks

An employee handbook can bring together the organisation's principal workplace policies and explain how employment arrangements operate in practice.

Employers should be clear about which provisions are intended to be contractual and which are non-contractual policies or guidance.

This distinction can become important where the organisation later wants to update a policy.

Handbooks should also be reviewed periodically. Policies that no longer reflect legislation, organisational practice or the way employees actually work can create confusion rather than providing a reliable management framework.

5. Reporting and Management Structures

Employees should know who manages them and where they should go if a problem arises.

Managers should similarly understand who has authority to make particular decisions.

Clear structures become particularly important during formal HR processes. Depending on the organisation and circumstances, different individuals may need to undertake roles such as:

• investigating allegations;
• conducting disciplinary hearings;
• making formal decisions;
• hearing grievances; and
• considering appeals.

Separating these responsibilities where appropriate can help preserve objectivity and avoid situations where one manager effectively investigates, prosecutes and determines the same disputed matter without appropriate oversight.

6. Clear HR Escalation Routes

Managers should know when an employee issue needs to be escalated.

HR involvement should generally be considered where circumstances involve matters such as:

• formal disciplinary action;
• a formal grievance;
• serious misconduct;
• potential dismissal;
• discrimination or harassment;
• health conditions or disability;
• whistleblowing;
• significant contractual changes;
• serious workplace relationship breakdowns;
• redundancy or organisational restructuring; or
• a complaint involving the employee's manager.

Escalation does not necessarily mean removing responsibility from the line manager. HR can advise and support while the manager continues to manage the employee where appropriate.

The important point is that potentially high-risk matters are identified before significant decisions are made.

7. Employee Records

Good record keeping supports effective employee management.

Employers should maintain appropriate records of significant matters such as:

• employment terms;
• role changes;
• objectives;
• performance reviews;
• training;
• significant management conversations;
• attendance;
• workplace adjustments;
• grievances;
• disciplinary matters; and
• other formal HR processes.

Records should be accurate, relevant and proportionate.

Managers should avoid speculative or inappropriate comments about employees. Internal emails, instant messages and management notes can become important evidence if a dispute later develops.

Records should therefore be written on the assumption that the organisation may later need to explain objectively what happened and why a particular decision was made.

8. Manager Training

Policies are only effective if managers know how to use them.

Manager training should therefore cover practical people-management skills as well as formal HR procedures.

This may include:

• setting expectations;
• giving feedback;
• having difficult conversations;
• managing performance;
• addressing attendance concerns;
• recognising potential misconduct;
• handling employee complaints;
• maintaining appropriate records;
• recognising equality and disability issues;
• identifying potential whistleblowing or health and safety concerns; and
• knowing when to escalate an issue.

Managers should not be expected to diagnose complex legal issues themselves. They should, however, be capable of recognising warning signs and obtaining support before taking action that could materially affect an employee.

9. Consistency Across the Organisation

A common management framework helps reduce unexplained differences in how employees are treated across departments, locations or management teams.

Consistency does not mean that every employee must receive exactly the same outcome.

Different circumstances can justify different management responses. The seriousness of the issue, the employee's explanation, previous history, relevant health circumstances and other material factors may all affect the appropriate outcome.

The objective is to apply a consistent decision-making framework while considering the individual facts of each case.

Central policies, manager training and HR oversight can help organisations achieve this balance.

10. Creating a Management Framework Before Problems Arise

The most effective time to establish an employee-management framework is before the organisation faces a serious employee problem.

Employers should be able to answer basic questions such as:

Do employees know what is expected of them?

Do managers know what they are responsible for?

Are workplace policies current and accessible?

Do managers know when to involve HR?

Are significant employee decisions properly documented?

Can the organisation apply its management approach consistently across different teams?

Establishing these foundations allows managers to concentrate on managing employees rather than trying to design an HR process after a difficult situation has already developed.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section C: Managing Employees From the Start of Employment

Effective employee management begins from the start of the employment relationship. The early stages of employment provide employers with an opportunity to establish expectations, explain workplace standards, identify support needs and assess whether the employee is adapting successfully to the role.

Problems can develop where employers recruit an employee and then provide little structured management until something goes wrong. By that point, the employee may have developed working practices that do not meet the organisation's expectations, while the manager may believe standards should have been obvious.

A structured approach to onboarding and probation can help avoid this disconnect.

1. Employee Onboarding

Onboarding should help the employee understand both their role and how the organisation operates.

Depending on the position, the onboarding process may include:

• introductions to relevant colleagues and teams;
• clarification of reporting arrangements;
• explanation of the employee's role and responsibilities;
• access to required systems and equipment;
• workplace policies and procedures;
• working hours and attendance requirements;
• sickness absence reporting;
• health and safety requirements;
• information security and confidentiality;
• training requirements; and
• information about where the employee can obtain help or raise concerns.

Onboarding should not necessarily be treated as a single event completed during the employee's first day or week. Employees may need additional information, training and management support as they become familiar with the organisation and assume greater responsibility.

2. Setting Expectations From the Beginning

Employees should understand what successful performance looks like.

Managers should explain the employee's responsibilities, priorities and expected standards rather than relying solely on the job description.

Depending on the role, expectations may relate to:

• objectives and targets;
• quality of work;
• accuracy;
• deadlines;
• attendance and punctuality;
• communication;
• customer or client standards;
• workplace behaviour;
• regulatory or compliance requirements;
• team responsibilities; and
• reporting requirements.

Expectations should be sufficiently clear for the employee to understand what is required and for the manager subsequently to assess whether those requirements are being met.

This becomes particularly important if performance concerns later arise. It can be difficult to manage an employee fairly for failing to achieve a standard that was never adequately explained.

3. Induction and Workplace Standards

Employees should be introduced to the policies and workplace standards relevant to their role.

Simply making a large employee handbook available may not be sufficient where particular rules are important to the employee's work.

For example, employees may require specific information or training concerning:

• health and safety;
• confidentiality;
• data protection;
• IT security;
• social media;
• equality and workplace behaviour;
• regulatory requirements;
• financial controls; or
• sector-specific compliance obligations.

Where compliance with a particular rule is important, employers should be able to demonstrate that employees were given appropriate information about the requirement.

4. Managing Probation Periods

Probation periods can provide a structured opportunity to assess whether a new employee is suitable for the role and organisation.

Probation should be actively managed rather than treated as a date in the calendar.

Depending on the role, managers may assess matters such as:

• performance;
• quality of work;
• attendance;
• conduct;
• reliability;
• progress against objectives;
• ability to work with colleagues;
• response to training and feedback; and
• overall suitability for the role.

Managers should hold appropriate review discussions during the probation period rather than waiting until shortly before it expires.

This allows concerns to be identified while there is still time for the employee to respond and improve.

5. Probation Is a Contractual and Management Mechanism

Employers should not treat probation as a period during which employment law does not apply.

A probation period is principally a contractual and management mechanism for assessing an employee's suitability. It does not itself determine whether the employee has particular statutory employment rights.

Employees in probation can still have important protections relating to matters such as discrimination, pregnancy and maternity, whistleblowing, health and safety and other statutory rights.

The ordinary unfair dismissal qualifying period is also changing. At the time of publication, ordinary unfair dismissal protection generally requires two years' qualifying service, subject to important exceptions including dismissals for certain automatically unfair reasons. From 1 January 2027, the qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal is due to reduce to six months.

This will materially increase the importance of active probation management. Employers using six-month probation periods in particular should not assume they can wait until the end of probation before assessing whether the employment relationship should continue.

Probation reviews should be conducted throughout the period so that concerns are identified and addressed while the employer retains appropriate management options.

6. Providing Feedback During Probation

Employees should be told when their performance or conduct during probation is causing concern.

A useful probation discussion should identify:

• the specific concern;
• the standard expected;
• examples demonstrating the problem;
• what improvement is required;
• any training or support available; and
• when progress will be reviewed.

The employee should also have an opportunity to explain their position.

This may reveal that the employee has not received sufficient training, misunderstood an instruction, is experiencing difficulties with workload or requires some other form of support.

Where health or disability is raised, the employer may also need to consider whether additional information or reasonable adjustments are required.

7. Addressing Early Performance or Conduct Problems

Employers should address concerns during probation rather than postponing them until the final review.

Early problems may include:

• poor performance;
• repeated lateness;
• unreliable attendance;
• communication problems;
• failure to follow instructions;
• inappropriate behaviour;
• poor quality work; or
• concerns about reliability.

The appropriate response will depend on the seriousness and circumstances of the issue.

Some concerns may be resolved through clarification, feedback or additional training. More serious conduct may require a formal process even though the employee remains in probation.

Employers should also avoid assuming that an apparent performance or conduct issue is necessarily straightforward. An underlying health condition, disability, workplace conflict or other protected circumstance may be relevant.

8. Extending a Probation Period

An employer may sometimes consider extending probation where the contractual arrangements permit this and there is a genuine need for further assessment.

An extension may be appropriate, for example, where:

• the employee has shown improvement but requires further assessment;
• absence has prevented a meaningful assessment;
• required training has been delayed;
• the employee has not had sufficient opportunity to demonstrate particular aspects of the role; or
• additional time is reasonably required to assess agreed improvements.

The employer should explain why probation is being extended, what needs to happen during the extension and when a further decision will be made.

Extensions should not be used simply because the manager failed to manage the original probation period properly.

Employers should also check the contractual basis for extending probation before doing so.

9. Deciding Whether an Employee Has Passed Probation

At the end of the probation period, the employer should make a clear decision rather than allowing the position to remain uncertain.

The possible outcomes may include:

• confirming successful completion of probation;
• extending probation where appropriate and contractually permitted;
• continuing with further structured performance management; or
• ending employment where the employee has not demonstrated the required suitability.

The appropriate option will depend on the circumstances and the employer's contractual and legal position.

Where termination is being considered, the employer should identify the genuine reason for the decision, review the evidence and consider whether any statutory protection or protected circumstance is relevant.

This becomes increasingly important as the employee approaches applicable statutory qualifying periods.

10. Ending Employment During Probation

An employee who is not meeting the required standard may potentially have their employment terminated during probation, but employers should not assume that the word "probation" removes the need to consider employment law risk.

Before terminating employment, the employer should consider:

• why employment is being terminated;
• whether concerns have been communicated;
• what evidence supports the decision;
• the employee's explanation;
• applicable contractual notice;
• whether discrimination could be alleged;
• whether pregnancy, maternity or family-related rights are relevant;
• whether disability or health issues have arisen;
• whether the employee has made a protected disclosure;
• whether health and safety activity is relevant; and
• whether another statutory protection may apply.

Dismissals connected with certain protected reasons can attract specific statutory protection irrespective of the ordinary unfair dismissal qualifying period. Discrimination protection also does not depend on an employee completing a particular length of service.

Where any of these issues arise, employers should obtain appropriate advice before proceeding.

11. Moving Beyond Probation

Successful completion of probation should mark the transition into ongoing employee management rather than the end of active management.

Objectives should continue to be reviewed, feedback should remain regular and development needs should be identified.

Employers should avoid allowing employees who performed well during probation to go for long periods without meaningful management contact.

The same principles established during the early employment relationship  clear expectations, regular communication, timely feedback and early intervention  should continue throughout employment.

Managing employees effectively from the start creates a stronger foundation for the employment relationship and makes it easier to address problems fairly and consistently if they later arise.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section D: Managing Employees Day to Day

Day-to-day management has a significant influence on employee performance, workplace relationships and the likelihood of HR problems developing. Employers that manage employees consistently through regular communication and early intervention are generally better placed to identify and resolve issues before they become serious.

Effective day-to-day management does not require constant supervision or unnecessary formality. The objective is to create sufficient management contact for employees to understand what is expected, receive useful feedback and raise problems when they arise.

The appropriate level of management will vary according to the employee, role and workplace. An experienced senior employee may require substantially less supervision than someone who is new to a role, but both should understand their responsibilities and how their performance will be assessed.

1. Maintaining Regular Communication

Regular communication between managers and employees helps maintain clarity about priorities, performance and workplace developments.

Communication may take place through:

• one-to-one meetings;
• team meetings;
• informal conversations;
• performance reviews;
• project meetings;
• written updates; or
• remote meetings where employees work away from the workplace.

The frequency and format should reflect the nature of the work rather than becoming a process for its own sake.

Managers should use these interactions to understand what employees are working on, identify obstacles and ensure priorities remain clear.

Regular communication also makes difficult conversations easier. Where meaningful management contact is normal, feedback about a developing concern is less likely to appear suddenly or unexpectedly.

2. Setting and Reviewing Priorities

Employee priorities can change as business requirements develop.

Managers should ensure employees understand which tasks are most important and how competing demands should be managed.

This can be particularly important where an employee is responsible to several people or works across multiple projects. An apparent performance problem may sometimes result from unclear or conflicting instructions rather than a lack of ability or effort.

Where priorities change materially, managers should communicate the change and consider whether existing objectives or deadlines remain realistic.

Employees should not ordinarily be criticised for failing to satisfy expectations that were never clearly communicated or that became impossible because of conflicting management instructions.

3. Giving Effective Feedback

Feedback should not be reserved for annual appraisals or situations where something has gone wrong.

Regular feedback allows managers to reinforce good performance while correcting problems before they become established.

Effective feedback should generally be:

• specific;
• timely;
• based on identifiable examples;
• connected to the expected standard;
• constructive; and
• clear about what should happen next.

Telling an employee that their performance is "not good enough" provides limited practical guidance. Identifying the particular work that fell below standard, explaining what was required and agreeing what should change gives the employee a clearer opportunity to respond.

Managers should also recognise good work. Employee management should not become a process in which management attention is provided only when there is a problem.

4. Monitoring Performance Without Micromanaging

Managers need sufficient information to understand whether employees are performing effectively.

The appropriate level of monitoring depends on the role, the employee's experience, the risks associated with the work and whether concerns have already arisen.

Monitoring may involve:

• reviewing work output;
• checking progress against objectives;
• monitoring deadlines;
• reviewing quality or accuracy;
• considering customer or client feedback;
• reviewing relevant performance indicators; or
• holding regular progress discussions.

Monitoring should have a legitimate management purpose and should not become excessive or unnecessarily intrusive.

Where technology is used to monitor employees, employers should also consider applicable data protection and privacy requirements and ensure monitoring is justified, proportionate and appropriately communicated.

5. Recognising Changes in Employee Performance or Behaviour

Managers are often the first people to notice when an employee's performance, attendance or behaviour changes.

Possible indicators may include:

• a decline in work quality;
• missed deadlines;
• increased absence;
• repeated lateness;
• withdrawal from colleagues;
• uncharacteristic behaviour;
• increased conflict;
• difficulty concentrating;
• reduced productivity; or
• significant changes in communication.

Managers should avoid immediately assuming why a change has occurred.

There may be a performance issue, but there may also be workload pressures, unclear instructions, workplace conflict, a health condition, disability, personal circumstances or another explanation.

An appropriate management conversation can help establish whether there is an underlying issue that needs to be addressed.

6. Addressing Minor Problems Early

Minor problems can become more difficult when managers repeatedly avoid dealing with them.

An employee who is occasionally late, misses a deadline or fails to follow an expected process may initially require little more than a straightforward management conversation.

The manager should explain:

• what the concern is;
• why it matters;
• what standard is expected;
• whether the employee has an explanation; and
• what needs to happen going forward.

This type of early intervention can often resolve the issue without the need for a formal procedure.

It also prevents a situation where the employer tolerates behaviour for a prolonged period and then suddenly attempts to impose a significantly more serious response.

7. Distinguishing a One-Off Problem From a Pattern

Managers should consider whether an issue is isolated or forms part of a wider pattern.

A single missed deadline may have a reasonable explanation. Repeated missed deadlines despite previous discussions may indicate a performance problem requiring more structured intervention.

Similarly, an isolated late arrival may require little management response, whereas repeated lateness may justify an attendance discussion or potentially further action depending on the circumstances.

Maintaining proportionate records of previous conversations can help managers identify patterns and avoid repeatedly treating recurring problems as isolated incidents.

8. Supporting Employee Development

Managing employees is not limited to correcting problems. Employers should also consider how employees can develop their skills and contribute more effectively.

Development may involve:

• training;
• coaching;
• mentoring;
• additional responsibilities;
• professional development;
• new projects;
• career discussions; or
• opportunities to develop particular skills.

Development conversations can also help employers identify employees who are ready for greater responsibility or whose skills could be used more effectively elsewhere within the organisation.

Where development opportunities are available, employers should also be mindful of equality considerations and avoid allowing informal assumptions or manager preferences to create unjustified barriers to access.

9. Maintaining Appropriate Management Boundaries

Managers can develop positive and supportive relationships with employees without losing the distinction between colleague, friend and manager.

Problems can arise where a manager becomes reluctant to address poor performance or conduct because of a personal relationship with an employee, or where some employees receive greater flexibility or opportunities because they are personally closer to the manager.

Managers should therefore remain capable of making objective decisions even where they have strong working relationships with employees.

Appropriate boundaries are also important when employees disclose sensitive personal information. Managers should listen appropriately but should avoid making commitments they are not authorised to make or sharing confidential information unnecessarily.

10. Managing Remote and Hybrid Employees

Remote and hybrid working can require managers to adapt their management approach.

Employees who are not regularly present in the workplace may have fewer informal opportunities to discuss problems, ask questions or receive feedback.

Managers should ensure remote employees remain appropriately connected to the organisation and have clear opportunities for management contact.

Performance should ordinarily be assessed by reference to legitimate role requirements and work outcomes rather than assumptions based solely on physical visibility.

Employers should also ensure that workplace expectations concerning availability, communication, attendance at meetings, information security and use of equipment are clear.

Where monitoring technology is used, privacy and data protection considerations should form part of the employer's decision-making.

11. Recording Significant Management Conversations

Not every conversation between a manager and employee needs a formal written record.

However, where a conversation concerns a significant performance, conduct, attendance or workplace issue, a proportionate record can be valuable.

A useful management note may record:

• the date of the discussion;
• the issue discussed;
• the employee's explanation;
• the expected standard;
• any support agreed;
• actions to be taken; and
• when the position will be reviewed.

For more significant discussions, it may be appropriate to confirm the main points with the employee in writing.

Records should be factual and professional. Managers should avoid unnecessary personal commentary, speculation about motives or language that could suggest a predetermined view of the employee.

12. Applying Standards Consistently

Employees should have reasonable confidence that workplace standards will be applied consistently.

If one manager routinely ignores lateness while another treats the same issue seriously, employees may receive conflicting messages about what the organisation actually expects.

Managers should therefore understand the organisation's standards and communicate with HR or other managers where consistency issues arise.

Consistency does not require identical outcomes. Relevant differences between employees and circumstances may justify different responses.

The important question is whether the employer can explain objectively why a particular management response was appropriate in the circumstances.

13. Knowing When Day-to-Day Management Is No Longer Enough

Most employee issues should begin with ordinary management where the circumstances allow it, but managers need to recognise when the problem has moved beyond that stage.

Escalation may be appropriate where:

• an issue continues despite previous management intervention;
• performance remains materially below the required standard;
• conduct may amount to misconduct;
• an allegation requires investigation;
• absence becomes persistent or long term;
• an employee raises a formal complaint;
• discrimination, harassment or victimisation is alleged;
• a potential protected disclosure is made;
• health or disability may materially affect the situation;
• the relationship between employees has seriously deteriorated; or
• the employer is considering formal sanctions or dismissal.

At this point, the employer should consider whether a formal HR procedure, further investigation or specialist advice is required.

The strength of day-to-day employee management lies in identifying these issues early. Managers should neither formalise every minor workplace problem nor allow serious concerns to remain indefinitely within informal management.

Effective management requires knowing the difference.

 

 

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section E: Managing Employee Performance

Managing employee performance is a core part of managing employees. Employers need to ensure that employees understand the standards expected of them, receive appropriate support and are given a reasonable opportunity to address performance concerns where improvement is possible.

Performance problems should not automatically be treated as disciplinary issues. Poor performance may result from a lack of capability, insufficient training, unclear expectations, workload problems, health issues or other circumstances. Establishing the cause of the problem is therefore an important first step.

Where an employee is capable of performing the role but deliberately refuses to meet reasonable requirements, the issue may instead involve conduct. Distinguishing between capability and conduct can affect how the employer should respond.

1. Setting Clear Performance Standards

Employees should know what they are expected to achieve.

Depending on the role, performance standards may relate to:

• quality of work;
• accuracy;
• productivity;
• sales or other measurable targets;
• deadlines;
• customer or client service;
• technical competence;
• management responsibilities;
• communication;
• compliance requirements; or
• other role-specific objectives.

Employers should ensure that performance measures are relevant to the role and sufficiently clear for employees to understand what is required.

Where targets are used, employers should also consider whether they remain realistic when circumstances change. Significant changes in workload, resources, responsibilities, market conditions or organisational priorities may affect whether an existing target remains an appropriate measure of performance.

2. Identifying a Performance Problem

A performance concern should be based on identifiable evidence rather than a general impression that the employee is not performing well.

Evidence might include:

• missed deadlines;
• work containing repeated errors;
• failure to achieve agreed objectives;
• customer or client complaints;
• poor productivity;
• failure to complete required tasks;
• quality-control information; or
• specific examples of work falling below the required standard.

Managers should be able to explain both what the employee has done and how this differs from the standard expected.

This helps the employee understand the concern and gives the employer a clearer basis for assessing whether improvement occurs.

3. Understanding Why Performance Has Declined

Before deciding how to respond, the manager should consider why the employee is struggling.

Possible causes can include:

• lack of knowledge or skill;
• insufficient training;
• unclear instructions;
• unrealistic workload;
• lack of appropriate resources;
• changes to the employee's role;
• poor supervision;
• workplace conflict;
• health problems;
• disability;
• personal circumstances; or
• lack of effort or engagement.

The appropriate management response may differ substantially depending on the cause.

An employee who has never been trained to perform a particular task may require training rather than formal capability action. An employee whose performance has changed because of a health condition may require a discussion about medical information or reasonable adjustments. An employee who understands the requirement but deliberately refuses to comply may present a conduct issue rather than a capability problem.

4. Performance or Conduct?

The distinction between performance and conduct can be important.

A capability issue generally concerns whether the employee is able to perform the role to the required standard.

A conduct issue generally concerns the employee's behaviour or a failure to comply with workplace requirements despite being capable of doing so.

For example, an employee who cannot achieve a required technical standard despite reasonable effort may present a capability issue. An employee who is capable of completing required work but repeatedly refuses a reasonable instruction may present a conduct issue.

The distinction is not always straightforward. Employers should establish the facts rather than attaching a label to the problem too quickly.

5. Informal Performance Management

Where appropriate, performance concerns should initially be addressed through ordinary management.

An informal performance discussion may cover:

• the areas where performance is below expectation;
• examples demonstrating the concern;
• the required standard;
• the employee's explanation;
• any barriers to performance;
• training or support required;
• the improvement expected;
• the period over which improvement will be assessed; and
• when progress will be reviewed.

The purpose should be to make the employee aware of the problem and provide a realistic opportunity to improve.

Managers should avoid allowing informal performance management to continue indefinitely where there is no meaningful improvement. If the employee remains materially below the required standard despite appropriate support and clear expectations, a more formal process may become necessary.

6. Supporting Performance Improvement

Employers should consider whether reasonable support could enable the employee to reach the required standard.

Support may include:

• additional training;
• coaching;
• closer supervision;
• clarification of responsibilities;
• additional resources;
• changes to workflow;
• more frequent feedback;
• mentoring; or
• appropriate workplace adjustments.

The support required will depend on the circumstances. Employers are not necessarily required to provide unlimited assistance or accept indefinitely inadequate performance, but they should be able to demonstrate that the employee was given a reasonable opportunity to meet the required standard before serious formal action is taken.

7. Using a Performance Improvement Plan

A performance improvement plan, commonly referred to as a PIP, can provide a structured framework for addressing identified performance concerns.

A PIP may set out:

• the specific areas requiring improvement;
• the expected performance standard;
• how improvement will be measured;
• the support or training being provided;
• the review period;
• review dates; and
• the potential consequences if sufficient improvement is not achieved.

A PIP should be meaningful rather than designed simply to create documentation supporting a predetermined dismissal.

Targets should be sufficiently clear and realistic to allow the employee a genuine opportunity to demonstrate improvement.

The appropriate review period will depend on the role and the nature of the concern. Some performance issues can be assessed relatively quickly, while others require a longer period before meaningful improvement can be evaluated.

8. Reviewing Performance During the Improvement Period

Managers should continue to engage with the employee during any improvement period.

Waiting until the final review before providing further feedback can undermine the effectiveness of the process.

Review meetings can be used to:

• assess progress;
• identify continuing concerns;
• recognise improvements;
• clarify expectations;
• consider whether additional support is appropriate; and
• address new information raised by the employee.

Where the employee is improving but has not yet reached the required standard, the employer may need to consider whether further time is reasonable.

Where there has been little or no improvement despite clear expectations and appropriate support, formal capability action may become appropriate.

9. Formal Capability Procedures

Where informal performance management has not resolved the issue, or where the circumstances justify a formal approach, the employer may need to use a formal capability procedure.

The precise process will depend on the organisation's policies and the circumstances, but it may involve:

• written notification of the performance concerns;
• a formal meeting;
• an opportunity for the employee to respond;
• consideration of relevant evidence;
• formal improvement requirements;
• warnings where appropriate;
• further review periods; and
• an appeal against formal decisions.

The employee should understand the seriousness of the process and the potential consequences if the required improvement is not achieved.

Employers should follow their applicable procedures and act reasonably throughout the process.

10. Performance Management and Disability

Performance concerns require particular care where an employee is disabled or where the employer knows, or could reasonably be expected to know, that disability may be relevant.

A disability can affect performance in different ways. An employee may experience difficulty with particular tasks, concentration, communication, attendance, working hours or aspects of the working environment.

Employers should not assume that disability prevents performance management. Employees can still be required to perform their roles to appropriate standards.

However, the employer may need to understand how the disability affects the employee and consider its duty to make reasonable adjustments.

Depending on the circumstances, adjustments might involve:

• changes to equipment;
• changes to working arrangements;
• additional training or supervision;
• adjustments to communication methods;
• changes to particular duties;
• changes to working hours;
• additional breaks; or
• other reasonable measures that address a substantial disadvantage.

Medical or occupational health information may be appropriate where the employer needs a better understanding of the employee's condition, its impact on work or potential adjustments.

Employers should consider relevant adjustments before concluding that an employee cannot meet the required standard.

11. Performance Problems Connected With Health

Not every health-related performance problem will involve a disability, but employers should still consider whether health is materially affecting the employee's ability to work.

The employer may need to understand:

• whether the condition is temporary or ongoing;
• how it affects the employee's work;
• whether treatment or recovery is expected to change the position;
• whether temporary support is appropriate; and
• whether medical or occupational health advice would assist.

Managers should avoid attempting to diagnose medical conditions themselves. The management question is usually how the employee's health affects their work and what reasonable steps the employer should consider in response.

12. Documenting Performance Management

Employers should maintain appropriate records of significant performance concerns and the steps taken to address them.

Records may include:

• examples of performance shortfalls;
• objectives and expected standards;
• notes of performance discussions;
• the employee's explanations;
• training or support provided;
• agreed improvement measures;
• PIPs;
• review outcomes;
• formal warnings; and
• relevant medical or occupational health information where lawfully obtained and appropriately handled.

Good documentation can demonstrate that the employer identified the problem, communicated its concerns and provided an appropriate opportunity for improvement.

Records should remain objective. Managers should avoid language suggesting that dismissal has already been decided before the performance process has been completed.

13. When Performance Does Not Improve

Where an employee remains unable to meet the required standard despite appropriate management, support and a reasonable opportunity to improve, the employer may need to consider further action.

Depending on the circumstances, this could include:

• a further review period;
• additional support;
• alternative duties or another role where appropriate and available;
• further formal warnings; or
• ultimately, dismissal on capability grounds.

Employers are not required to maintain an employment relationship indefinitely where an employee cannot perform the role to the required standard. However, dismissal should generally follow a fair and reasonable process and should not be treated as the predetermined purpose of performance management.

ACAS guidance recognises that employers should support employees to improve where appropriate and that dismissal for capability should ordinarily be considered as a last resort.

14. Dismissal for Poor Performance

Capability can potentially provide a fair reason for dismissal under the statutory unfair dismissal framework, but identifying a potentially fair reason does not by itself make a dismissal fair.

Before dismissing for poor performance, employers should consider matters such as:

• whether the required standard was clear;
• whether there is reliable evidence of the performance problem;
• whether concerns were communicated to the employee;
• whether the employee was given an opportunity to respond;
• whether appropriate support or training was provided;
• whether sufficient time was allowed for improvement;
• whether relevant warnings were given;
• whether health or disability issues were considered;
• whether reasonable adjustments were required;
• whether any appropriate alternative to dismissal exists; and
• whether the employer has followed a fair procedure.

The fairness of a capability dismissal will depend on the particular circumstances. Employers should obtain advice before dismissal where the position is complex, disputed or involves additional legal protections.

15. Managing Performance Without Avoiding Difficult Decisions

A fair performance process does not require an employer to accept permanently inadequate performance.

The purpose of effective performance management is to establish what is wrong, provide an appropriate opportunity for improvement and make an evidence-based decision about whether the employee can perform the role to the required standard.

Where the employee improves, the process has achieved its primary objective.

Where the employee does not improve despite clear expectations, reasonable support and appropriate opportunity, the employer may be entitled to progress towards a more serious outcome.

The key is that the decision should emerge from the evidence and the process rather than the process being constructed merely to justify a decision that has already been made.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section F: Managing Employee Conduct

Managing employee conduct involves setting appropriate standards of workplace behaviour and responding fairly when employees fail to meet those standards. Conduct issues can range from relatively minor problems that can be resolved through ordinary management to serious allegations requiring investigation and formal disciplinary action.

Employers should avoid assuming that an allegation establishes misconduct. Before disciplinary action is taken, the employer should establish the relevant facts, give the employee an opportunity to respond and decide what action is reasonable in the circumstances.

The response should also be proportionate to the seriousness of the conduct. Not every breach of a workplace rule requires a formal disciplinary procedure, while potentially serious misconduct should not be left indefinitely within informal management.

1. Setting Standards of Conduct

Employees should understand the standards of behaviour expected in the workplace.

Relevant standards may be contained in:

• employment contracts;
• disciplinary rules;
• employee handbooks;
• codes of conduct;
• health and safety procedures;
• equality and anti-harassment policies;
• IT and information-security policies;
• social media policies;
• confidentiality requirements;
• professional or regulatory rules; and
• reasonable management instructions.

Some expectations will also arise from the nature of the employment relationship even where every possible form of unacceptable behaviour is not expressly listed in a policy.

Employers should nevertheless make important workplace rules sufficiently clear, particularly where breach of a rule could result in serious disciplinary consequences.

2. Addressing Minor Conduct Concerns

Minor conduct issues can often be dealt with through ordinary management.

Examples might include occasional lateness, minor inappropriate behaviour, failure to follow a relatively minor procedure or an isolated failure to meet an expected workplace standard.

A manager may initially need to explain:

• what behaviour caused concern;
• the standard expected;
• why the issue matters;
• the employee's explanation;
• what needs to change; and
• what may happen if the behaviour continues.

A proportionate record of the discussion may be appropriate, particularly where recurrence could result in formal action.

Informal management should not be confused with ignoring misconduct. The purpose is to correct the behaviour at an appropriate level before escalation becomes necessary.

3. When Conduct May Require Formal Action

A formal disciplinary process may become appropriate where alleged misconduct is sufficiently serious or where less serious behaviour continues despite previous management intervention.

Examples of matters that may potentially require formal consideration include:

• repeated failure to follow reasonable instructions;
• persistent lateness or unauthorised absence;
• inappropriate behaviour towards colleagues;
• breach of workplace policies;
• misuse of company systems or equipment;
• confidentiality breaches;
• dishonesty;
• health and safety breaches;
• bullying or harassment allegations;
• serious insubordination;
• violence or threats;
• theft or fraud; or
• other conduct potentially affecting the employment relationship.

The seriousness of an allegation should be assessed in context. Employers should not assume that conduct falls into a particular category simply because a policy uses a particular label.

4. Allegations Are Not Findings

One of the most important principles when managing misconduct is the distinction between an allegation and an established fact.

A complaint, report or accusation may justify investigation, but it does not itself establish that misconduct occurred.

Managers should therefore avoid:

• describing an employee as guilty before the matter has been investigated;
• telling colleagues that misconduct has been established prematurely;
• drafting disciplinary outcomes before hearing the employee's response;
• allowing assumptions about the employee to replace evidence; or
• approaching the disciplinary process as a mechanism for confirming a decision already made.

The employer should keep an open mind until the relevant evidence and the employee's explanation have been considered.

5. Investigating Employee Misconduct

Where the facts are disputed or the allegation is potentially serious, an investigation may be required before a disciplinary decision can properly be made.

The purpose of the investigation is to establish the relevant facts rather than to prove that the employee is guilty.

Depending on the circumstances, an investigation may involve:

• speaking to the employee concerned;
• interviewing witnesses;
• reviewing emails or other communications;
• examining documents;
• reviewing relevant records;
• considering CCTV or other lawfully obtained evidence;
• reviewing applicable policies; and
• identifying evidence that supports or contradicts the allegation.

The scope of the investigation should be proportionate to the seriousness and complexity of the issue.

A relatively straightforward allegation may require only limited enquiries. Serious allegations capable of resulting in dismissal may justify a substantially more detailed investigation.

6. Suspension During an Investigation

Suspension should not automatically follow an allegation of serious misconduct.

An employer may consider suspension where there is a legitimate reason why the employee should temporarily remain away from work while an investigation takes place. This might arise where there is a genuine concern about interference with evidence or witnesses, risk to people or property, or another significant workplace risk.

Employers should consider whether alternatives to suspension could address the concern.

Depending on the circumstances, alternatives might include:

• temporary changes to duties;
• temporary changes to reporting arrangements;
• working from another location;
• restricted access to particular systems; or
• temporary separation from particular employees.

Where suspension is considered necessary, it should ordinarily be kept under review and should not be presented as a disciplinary sanction or evidence that the employer has already concluded the employee committed misconduct.

7. The Formal Disciplinary Process

Where an investigation identifies a disciplinary case to answer, the employer may need to proceed to a formal disciplinary hearing.

The precise procedure will depend on the circumstances and applicable workplace policies, but employers should generally ensure that the employee understands the allegations and has a reasonable opportunity to respond before a decision is made.

A formal disciplinary process may involve:

• written notification of the allegations;
• appropriate information about the evidence;
• a disciplinary hearing;
• an opportunity for the employee to give their explanation;
• consideration of relevant evidence and mitigation;
• a reasoned decision;
• written confirmation of the outcome; and
• an appropriate opportunity to appeal.

Employers should take account of their own disciplinary procedure and the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures.

Employment Tribunals can take the ACAS Code into account in relevant cases. Where a claim to which the Code applies succeeds, an unreasonable failure by either party to comply with the Code can also result in an adjustment to compensation of up to 25%.

The ACAS Code should therefore be treated as an important part of the disciplinary framework rather than merely optional procedural guidance.

8. The Employee's Right to Respond

The disciplinary hearing should provide a genuine opportunity for the employee to respond to the case against them.

An employee may:

• dispute the allegation;
• challenge particular evidence;
• provide additional evidence;
• identify witnesses;
• explain the context;
• accept some facts but dispute their significance; or
• raise mitigating circumstances.

The decision-maker should consider relevant explanations before determining whether misconduct occurred and what, if any, disciplinary sanction is appropriate.

Where the employee raises significant new information during the hearing, further investigation may be necessary before a final decision is made.

9. Deciding Whether Misconduct Occurred

Employers do not generally need to establish misconduct to the criminal standard of proof before taking disciplinary action. The decision should instead be based on a reasonable assessment of the evidence following an appropriate investigation and process.

The decision-maker should consider matters such as:

• the evidence obtained;
• the employee's explanation;
• the reliability of relevant evidence;
• whether important evidence conflicts;
• the surrounding circumstances; and
• whether further enquiries are necessary.

The employer should be able to explain why it reached its conclusion.

Particular care should be taken where the potential consequence is dismissal.

10. Choosing an Appropriate Disciplinary Outcome

A finding of misconduct does not automatically determine the sanction.

The employer should consider what response is reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances.

Relevant considerations may include:

• the seriousness of the misconduct;
• the employee's explanation;
• any mitigating circumstances;
• the employee's disciplinary record;
• relevant live warnings;
• the employee's length and record of service where relevant;
• how comparable cases have been treated;
• whether the employee understood the relevant rule;
• the consequences of the conduct; and
• whether the employment relationship can reasonably continue.

Possible outcomes may range from no disciplinary action through to formal warnings and, in sufficiently serious cases, dismissal.

Consistency should be considered, but employers do not necessarily have to impose identical sanctions where the material circumstances differ.

11. Gross Misconduct

Gross misconduct generally refers to conduct sufficiently serious to amount to a fundamental breach of the employment relationship and potentially justify dismissal without notice or payment in lieu of notice.

Examples commonly identified by employers may include serious dishonesty, theft, violence, serious insubordination, serious harassment or serious breaches of health and safety, confidentiality or information security.

Whether particular behaviour amounts to gross misconduct will depend on the facts, the employment relationship, applicable workplace rules and the seriousness of the conduct.

Employers should not assume that describing behaviour as "gross misconduct" in a disciplinary policy automatically makes summary dismissal fair.

Even where gross misconduct is alleged, the employer should ordinarily investigate the allegation, provide the employee with an opportunity to respond and reach a reasonable decision before dismissal.

Summary dismissal concerns termination without notice because of sufficiently serious misconduct. It does not mean dismissal without a process.

12. Conduct Outside the Workplace

Employee conduct outside working hours does not automatically become an employment matter simply because the employer disapproves of it.

However, conduct outside work may become relevant where there is a sufficient connection with the employment relationship.

Depending on the circumstances, relevant issues might include:

• damage to the employer's reputation;
• impact on workplace relationships;
• conduct towards colleagues;
• breach of confidentiality;
• conflicts of interest;
• regulatory implications;
• loss of a qualification required for the role; or
• an impact on the employee's ability to perform their work.

Employers should identify the actual employment impact rather than assuming that any controversial behaviour outside work justifies disciplinary action.

13. Social Media Conduct

Social media can blur the boundary between employees' private lives and the workplace.

Potential concerns may arise where an employee:

• discloses confidential information;
• harasses or targets colleagues;
• publishes discriminatory material connected with the workplace;
• makes statements capable of materially affecting the employer's legitimate interests;
• misuses the employer's systems or branding; or
• breaches a legitimate workplace policy.

The employer should consider the actual content, context, audience, connection with employment and impact before deciding whether disciplinary action is justified.

Employers should also avoid assuming that every expression of personal opinion on a private social media account constitutes misconduct merely because the employer or colleagues disagree with it.

14. Criminal Allegations and Employee Conduct

An employee's arrest, criminal investigation or criminal charge does not automatically justify dismissal.

The employer should consider how the circumstances affect the employment relationship.

Relevant factors may include:

• the nature of the employee's role;
• the nature of the alleged offence;
• whether the allegation relates to work;
• regulatory requirements;
• safeguarding responsibilities;
• the employee's ability to perform their duties;
• reputational considerations where legitimately relevant; and
• whether workplace risks can be managed while the matter remains unresolved.

The employer may need to conduct its own reasonable workplace investigation rather than simply waiting for the outcome of criminal proceedings.

Care is required to avoid interfering with a police investigation or other external proceedings.

15. Conduct Issues Involving Discrimination or Harassment

Allegations involving discrimination, harassment, sexual harassment or victimisation require careful handling.

Employers should ensure complaints are taken seriously, considered objectively and investigated where appropriate.

The employer's responsibilities extend beyond deciding whether an individual employee should be disciplined. Employers should also consider whether workplace measures are needed to prevent unlawful conduct and protect employees.

Employers are subject to a statutory duty to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment of employees in the course of their employment. The wider legal framework relating to workplace harassment continues to develop, making preventative measures, manager training and effective responses to complaints increasingly important components of workforce management.

Preventative measures may include:

• appropriate workplace policies;
• risk assessment;
• manager and employee training;
• effective reporting routes;
• prompt responses to complaints;
• appropriate investigation;
• monitoring known workplace risks; and
• taking reasonable action where problematic behaviour is identified.

Employers should also be alert to the risk of retaliation against an employee who has complained about discrimination or harassment or supported another person's complaint.

16. Conduct Issues and Whistleblowing

Managers should take particular care where disciplinary concerns arise around the same time that an employee has raised concerns about wrongdoing.

An employee does not need to use the word "whistleblowing" for a disclosure potentially to engage whistleblowing protection.

Employers should therefore establish what the employee has actually raised and whether it may amount to a protected disclosure.

Whistleblowing protection does not give an employee general immunity from legitimate performance or conduct management. An employee who has made a protected disclosure can still be managed for genuine and unrelated misconduct.

The employer should, however, be able to demonstrate that any action taken was based on the genuine conduct issue rather than the fact that the employee raised protected concerns.

Contemporaneous evidence and clear separation between the different issues can become particularly important in these circumstances.

17. Overlapping Conduct and Grievance Issues

An employee facing disciplinary action may raise a grievance about the manager, investigation or circumstances surrounding the disciplinary issue.

This does not automatically mean that the disciplinary process must stop.

The employer should consider the relationship between the two matters.

Depending on the circumstances, it may be appropriate to:

• deal with the issues concurrently;
• address the grievance within the disciplinary process;
• investigate part of the grievance separately;
• temporarily pause one process; or
• appoint different people to deal with the respective issues.

The appropriate approach will depend on whether the grievance could materially affect the fairness or outcome of the disciplinary process.

18. Consistency in Disciplinary Decisions

Employers should consider how similar misconduct has been treated previously.

Significant unexplained differences can create employee-relations problems and may make a disciplinary decision more difficult to justify.

However, consistency does not mean applying a mechanical tariff.

Two incidents that appear similar may involve important differences in seriousness, circumstances, employee history, consequences or mitigation.

The employer should therefore consider previous cases while making an individual assessment of the current circumstances.

19. Documenting Conduct Management

Appropriate documentation can become particularly important where misconduct leads to formal action.

Relevant records may include:

• the original complaint or allegation;
• investigation notes;
• witness evidence;
• relevant documents or communications;
• the employee's explanation;
• disciplinary correspondence;
• meeting notes;
• the decision and reasons;
• formal warnings;
• appeal documentation; and
• records explaining why a particular sanction was selected.

Records should distinguish allegations from findings and facts from opinion.

Managers should avoid unnecessary commentary about the employee's personality or motives where this is not relevant to the issue being investigated.

20. Dismissal for Misconduct

Conduct can potentially provide a fair reason for dismissal under the statutory unfair dismissal framework. Whether a particular dismissal is fair will depend on the circumstances, including the employer's reason for dismissal and the reasonableness of its approach.

Before dismissing for misconduct, employers should consider matters such as:

• whether an appropriate investigation has been carried out;
• whether the employee understood the allegation;
• whether the employee had a reasonable opportunity to respond;
• whether relevant evidence was considered;
• whether the employer had reasonable grounds for its findings;
• whether the sanction is proportionate;
• whether relevant mitigation was considered;
• whether similar cases have been treated consistently;
• whether applicable disciplinary procedures were followed;
• whether the ACAS Code is relevant and has been taken into account;
• whether an appeal is available; and
• whether any discrimination, whistleblowing or other statutory protection is engaged.

Where gross misconduct is established following an appropriate process, dismissal without notice may potentially be justified. Where the misconduct does not justify summary dismissal, the employer should consider the employee's contractual and statutory notice rights.

21. Managing Conduct Fairly Without Avoiding Management

A fair disciplinary process does not prevent employers from enforcing legitimate workplace standards.

Employees can be expected to comply with reasonable instructions, behave appropriately towards colleagues, observe workplace rules and meet the conduct standards reasonably required by their roles.

The purpose of fair procedure is not to make disciplinary action impossible. It is to ensure that serious decisions are based on established facts rather than assumption, that employees have an opportunity to respond and that the employer's response is reasonable and proportionate.

Employers that address minor concerns early, investigate serious allegations properly and maintain clear disciplinary standards are better placed both to manage conduct effectively and to defend their decisions if they are later challenged.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section G: Managing Sickness Absence & Attendance

Managing sickness absence and attendance requires employers to balance operational requirements with fair treatment of employees who are unable to work because of ill health or other legitimate circumstances.

Employers are entitled to expect reasonable attendance and to manage unacceptable attendance levels. However, absence management can involve significant employment law risks, particularly where absence is connected with disability, pregnancy, workplace injury, mental health, family-related rights or other protected circumstances.

The objective should be to understand the nature of the absence, maintain appropriate contact, support employees where reasonably possible and identify when attendance concerns require more structured management.

1. Establishing Clear Attendance Expectations

Employees should understand the organisation's requirements for attendance and sickness reporting.

An absence policy may address matters such as:

• how and when sickness absence must be reported;
• who the employee should contact;
• information the employee is expected to provide;
• requirements for medical evidence;
• keeping in contact during absence;
• return-to-work procedures;
• sick pay arrangements;
• attendance monitoring;
• occupational health referrals; and
• potential consequences of persistent attendance problems.

Managers should understand these requirements and apply them appropriately.

Where employees are expected to follow a particular reporting process, that process should be sufficiently clear and accessible.

2. Recording and Monitoring Absence

Employers should maintain accurate records of employee absence.

Records can help identify:

• the frequency of absence;
• the duration of absence;
• recurring patterns;
• the reasons given for absence;
• whether medical evidence has been provided where required;
• whether attendance thresholds or review points have been reached; and
• whether further management intervention may be appropriate.

Absence data should be used carefully. A numerical trigger may indicate that a review is appropriate, but it should not necessarily determine the outcome automatically.

Employers should consider the circumstances behind the absence before deciding what action is appropriate.

3. Short-Term Sickness Absence

Occasional short-term sickness absence is a normal feature of employment. Concerns may arise where absence becomes frequent, persistent or disruptive.

Where short-term absence reaches a level of concern, managers should discuss the position with the employee.

The discussion may consider:

• the employee's attendance record;
• the reasons for absence;
• whether there is an underlying health condition;
• whether the employee is experiencing workplace difficulties;
• whether medical information may be appropriate;
• whether disability could be relevant;
• whether adjustments should be considered; and
• what attendance expectations apply going forward.

The purpose should be to understand the position rather than assume that repeated absence represents misconduct.

4. Return-to-Work Discussions

A return-to-work discussion can be a useful part of absence management.

Depending on the circumstances, it can allow the manager to:

• confirm that the employee is fit to return;
• understand the reason for the absence;
• identify whether further support is required;
• discuss any work-related factors;
• identify recurring absence patterns;
• consider whether medical advice is needed; and
• update the employee about relevant workplace developments.

The discussion should be proportionate to the absence. A brief illness may require little more than a straightforward conversation, while repeated or significant absence may justify a more detailed review.

Managers should handle health information sensitively and avoid intrusive questioning that is unnecessary for legitimate absence management.

5. Persistent Intermittent Absence

Repeated short periods of absence can create operational difficulties even where each individual absence appears relatively minor.

Employers can manage persistent intermittent absence, but should first understand whether there is an underlying explanation.

A structured attendance review may consider:

• the overall attendance record;
• frequency and pattern of absences;
• the reasons provided;
• the operational impact;
• previous management discussions;
• medical information where relevant;
• whether disability is involved;
• whether reasonable adjustments may be required; and
• the level of attendance reasonably required by the role.

Where there is no underlying protected or medical circumstance requiring a different approach, the employer may be able to establish attendance expectations and explain the potential consequences if attendance does not improve.

6. Long-Term Sickness Absence

Long-term sickness absence usually requires a different management approach from occasional short-term absence.

The employer may need to understand:

• the nature of the employee's health condition;
• the likely duration of absence;
• the employee's prognosis;
• whether and when a return to work may be possible;
• whether the employee could return with adjustments;
• whether alternative duties may be appropriate;
• whether disability is relevant; and
• the operational impact of continuing absence.

Regular and appropriate communication is usually important, but the frequency and form of contact should take account of the employee's circumstances.

Managers should avoid both extremes: abandoning contact with an absent employee for months or repeatedly contacting an employee in a way that becomes unreasonable or counterproductive.

7. Obtaining Medical Information

Medical information may be required where an employer cannot reasonably make an informed decision based solely on the information available.

Depending on the circumstances, information may be sought from:

• the employee;
• fit notes;
• the employee's treating medical practitioner, subject to the applicable requirements; or
• an occupational health professional.

The questions asked should relate to the employment issue the employer needs to understand.

For example, the employer may need information about:

• the likely duration of absence;
• the effect of the condition on the employee's work;
• the likely timescale for a return;
• whether the condition may be long term;
• what restrictions may apply;
• whether adjustments could support a return; and
• whether a phased return may be appropriate.

Medical information is sensitive personal data and should be obtained, accessed, used and retained in accordance with applicable data protection requirements.

8. Occupational Health

Occupational health advice can help employers understand the relationship between an employee's health and their work.

An occupational health assessment may assist with questions concerning:

• fitness for work;
• the likely duration of absence;
• functional limitations;
• possible workplace adjustments;
• phased returns;
• the likely effect of particular duties;
• whether further medical review is appropriate; and
• potential long-term capability.

Occupational health advice should inform management decision-making rather than replace it.

The employer remains responsible for deciding what steps are reasonable and appropriate in the employment relationship.

9. Sickness Absence and Disability

Employers should consider whether an employee's health condition may amount to a disability for the purposes of equality law.

Where disability is relevant, the employer may have a duty to make reasonable adjustments and should consider whether its ordinary attendance arrangements place the employee at a substantial disadvantage.

Potential adjustments will depend on the circumstances and may include:

• adjustments to working hours;
• changes to duties;
• changes to the working environment;
• additional breaks;
• home or hybrid working where appropriate;
• specialist equipment;
• changes to particular management processes;
• adjustments to absence triggers where reasonable; or
• a phased return to work.

Employers should not assume that all disability-related absence must simply be disregarded indefinitely. The legal requirement is to consider the individual circumstances, applicable equality obligations and reasonable adjustments before deciding how the absence should be managed.

10. Pregnancy-Related Sickness Absence

Pregnancy-related sickness requires particular care and should be identified separately from ordinary sickness absence where appropriate.

Employers should not simply aggregate pregnancy-related sickness with ordinary absence and apply attendance triggers or sanctions in a way that disadvantages an employee because of pregnancy.

Managers should therefore understand whether an absence is pregnancy-related and ensure it is recorded and managed appropriately.

Pregnancy-related sickness can also have specific consequences where it occurs during the period immediately before maternity leave is due to begin, making it important to identify the reason for absence accurately.

Where there is uncertainty about the correct treatment of pregnancy-related absence, employers should seek HR advice before taking attendance or disciplinary action.

11. Mental Health and Sickness Absence

Mental health conditions should be approached with the same seriousness as physical health conditions.

Employees may experience anxiety, depression, stress or other mental health difficulties that affect attendance, performance or behaviour at work.

Managers should avoid making assumptions about the employee's condition or attempting to provide a medical diagnosis.

Instead, the employer should consider:

• how the condition affects the employee's work;
• whether medical or occupational health information would assist;
• whether the condition may amount to a disability;
• whether workplace factors are contributing to the problem;
• whether reasonable adjustments should be considered; and
• what level of management contact is appropriate.

Where workplace stress is raised, employers should also consider whether working arrangements, workload, relationships or other workplace factors require investigation or action.

12. Sickness Absence or Misconduct?

Employers should distinguish genuine sickness absence from conduct issues connected with absence.

An employee who is genuinely unable to work because of illness is not ordinarily committing misconduct merely by being absent.

Separate conduct issues may arise where, for example, an employee:

• fails without reasonable explanation to follow sickness reporting requirements;
• provides deliberately false information;
• dishonestly claims sickness absence; or
• engages in other conduct inconsistent with their obligations.

The employer should establish the facts before treating the matter as misconduct.

Activities undertaken while an employee is signed off sick do not automatically prove dishonesty. Whether particular activity is inconsistent with the stated reason for absence will depend on the medical circumstances and nature of the activity.

13. Managing Attendance Standards

Employers can establish reasonable attendance standards and review points.

Attendance triggers can help identify cases requiring management attention, but they should generally operate as a prompt for review rather than an automatic disciplinary mechanism.

Before taking action, the employer should consider:

• the reason for absence;
• the employee's overall attendance record;
• whether absence is disability-related;
• whether absence is pregnancy-related;
• whether workplace injury or health and safety concerns are relevant;
• whether another protected circumstance applies;
• the operational impact of the absence; and
• whether adjustments or other support should be considered.

This allows employers to maintain legitimate attendance requirements without applying attendance rules mechanically to materially different circumstances.

14. Phased Returns to Work

A phased return can help an employee resume work after significant illness or injury.

Depending on the circumstances, a phased return may involve:

• reduced working hours;
• fewer working days;
• temporary changes to duties;
• reduced workload;
• additional breaks;
• temporary remote working; or
• gradual restoration of normal responsibilities.

The arrangements should be clear and reviewed periodically.

Employers should also establish how the phased return will affect pay and other contractual arrangements rather than allowing uncertainty to develop.

Where disability is involved, a phased return may form part of the employer's consideration of reasonable adjustments.

15. Medical Capability

There may eventually be circumstances where an employee's health prevents them from performing their role to the required standard or maintaining a level of attendance that the employer can reasonably sustain.

This can become a medical capability issue.

Before progressing towards dismissal, employers should usually consider matters such as:

• the available medical evidence;
• the employee's prognosis;
• the likely duration of continuing absence or incapacity;
• the employee's views;
• whether disability is relevant;
• reasonable adjustments;
• whether a return to the existing role is realistically possible;
• whether alternative work is available and appropriate;
• the operational impact of continued absence; and
• whether further time would materially change the position.

The employer should consult appropriately with the employee rather than making assumptions about their future ability to work.

16. Dismissal Because of Sickness Absence

Capability, including capability affected by ill health, can potentially provide a fair reason for dismissal under the statutory unfair dismissal framework. However, sickness absence does not automatically justify dismissal.

The employer should be able to demonstrate that it has considered the circumstances properly before reaching that stage.

Depending on the case, relevant considerations may include:

• the length and pattern of absence;
• the nature and likely duration of the health condition;
• medical evidence;
• consultation with the employee;
• the effect of absence on the organisation;
• the likelihood of a return to work;
• reasonable adjustments;
• possible alternative employment;
• whether further absence can reasonably be accommodated; and
• whether a fair procedure has been followed.

Where the employee is disabled, dismissal may also create separate discrimination risks if the employer has not properly considered its equality obligations.

Dismissal on health or attendance grounds should therefore generally be treated as a significant employment decision requiring careful review.

17. Maintaining Contact During Absence

Appropriate contact can help maintain the employment relationship while an employee is absent.

Managers and employees should, where possible, agree:

• how contact will take place;
• how frequently contact is appropriate;
• who will make contact;
• what information needs to be communicated; and
• whether the arrangements should change as the absence develops.

Contact should have a legitimate purpose. It may be used to discuss recovery, likely return dates, medical information, workplace developments or support.

The employer should take account of the nature of the employee's condition. In some cases, frequent contact may be helpful; in others, particularly where workplace circumstances are contributing to ill health, a different approach may be appropriate.

18. Managing the Employee's Return

Returning to work after significant absence may require active management.

The employer should consider whether the employee can immediately resume their full duties or whether temporary arrangements are required.

A return-to-work plan may address:

• working hours;
• duties;
• workload;
• workplace adjustments;
• management support;
• outstanding work;
• changes that occurred during the absence; and
• review arrangements.

Managers should also consider how the employee's return is communicated to colleagues while respecting medical confidentiality.

Employees do not necessarily need to know the details of a colleague's medical condition simply because working arrangements have been adjusted.

19. Consistency in Absence Management

Employers should apply their absence-management framework consistently while recognising that different health circumstances may require different responses.

Two employees with similar absence totals may have materially different situations. One may have several unrelated short-term illnesses, while another may have absence connected with disability or pregnancy.

Applying exactly the same response without considering those differences may not represent fair or legally appropriate management.

Consistency should therefore mean using a common framework for decision-making rather than automatically producing the same outcome from the same number of absence days.

20. When to Escalate an Attendance or Sickness Issue

HR involvement or specialist advice should be considered where:

• absence becomes persistent or long term;
• the employee may be disabled;
• reasonable adjustments are being considered;
• pregnancy-related sickness is involved;
• the employee alleges that work caused or aggravated the condition;
• workplace stress is raised;
• medical evidence is unclear or disputed;
• the employee cannot return to their existing role;
• formal attendance warnings are being considered;
• medical capability procedures may be required; or
• dismissal is being contemplated.

Effective absence management should allow employers to maintain reasonable attendance standards without treating sickness as merely a disciplinary problem.

The central management questions are why the employee is absent, what the available evidence shows, whether support or adjustment is appropriate and whether the organisation can reasonably sustain the position.

 

 

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section H: Managing Employee Concerns & Workplace Relationships

Workplace relationships do not always run smoothly. Employees may disagree with colleagues, experience difficulties with managers, raise concerns about how they have been treated or complain about behaviour they consider inappropriate.

Employers need to be able to distinguish ordinary workplace disagreements from matters requiring formal intervention. Some concerns can be resolved through early management discussions, while others may involve grievances, bullying or harassment allegations, discrimination, whistleblowing or other issues carrying significant employment law risk.

The employer's response can be as important as the original problem. Failing to take concerns seriously, allowing conflicts to continue unchecked or reacting adversely towards an employee because they have complained can escalate the situation and expose the organisation to additional risk.

1. Encouraging Employees to Raise Concerns

Employees should know how they can raise workplace concerns and who they should approach.

In many situations, an employee will initially speak informally with their manager. This can provide an opportunity to understand the issue and determine whether a relatively straightforward solution is available.

There should also be alternative reporting routes where the employee's manager is involved in the complaint or the employee does not feel able to approach them.

Depending on the organisation, this may involve:

• HR;
• another manager;
• a designated senior employee;
• a whistleblowing route;
• a grievance process; or
• another formal reporting channel.

Employees should not be expected to resolve serious workplace concerns entirely themselves simply because an informal approach would be administratively easier for the employer.

2. Dealing With Concerns Informally

Informal resolution can be effective where the problem is relatively minor and the parties remain capable of working constructively.

For example, a disagreement may have arisen because of poor communication, unclear responsibilities or a misunderstanding between colleagues.

A manager may be able to speak with those involved, clarify expectations and agree how the working relationship should operate going forward.

The objective should be to resolve the underlying issue rather than simply persuade the employee to withdraw their complaint.

Managers should also recognise the limits of informal intervention. Allegations of serious bullying, harassment, discrimination, retaliation or other significant wrongdoing may require a more structured response.

3. Employee Grievances

A grievance is a concern, problem or complaint raised by an employee in relation to their employment.

Grievances can relate to matters such as:

• treatment by a manager;
• workplace relationships;
• working conditions;
• pay or contractual arrangements;
• bullying or harassment;
• discrimination;
• workload;
• organisational decisions; or
• application of workplace policies.

Where an employee raises a formal grievance, the employer should deal with it under an appropriate grievance procedure.

The employee should normally be given an opportunity to explain their concerns and provide relevant information. The employer may need to investigate disputed facts before reaching a decision.

The extent of the process will depend on the nature and complexity of the grievance.

Employers should avoid assuming that a grievance is unfounded simply because management disagrees with the employee's interpretation of events. Equally, the fact that a grievance has been raised does not mean the employee's allegations have been established.

The purpose of the process is to understand the complaint, establish relevant facts and reach an appropriate outcome.

4. The ACAS Code and Grievance Handling

Employers should take account of the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures when dealing with formal grievances.

The Code provides an important procedural framework covering matters such as:

• raising grievances formally;
• holding meetings;
• allowing employees to explain their concerns;
• communicating outcomes; and
• providing an opportunity to appeal.

Employment Tribunals can take the ACAS Code into account in relevant cases. Where a claim to which the Code applies succeeds, an unreasonable failure to comply may result in an adjustment to compensation of up to 25%.

Employers should therefore treat grievance handling as a substantive management process rather than a purely administrative exercise.

5. Workplace Conflict

Not every workplace conflict amounts to misconduct or requires a formal grievance.

Employees may have different personalities, working styles or views about how work should be carried out. Managers may sometimes need to intervene to prevent these differences from affecting the wider team.

The first step should generally be to understand what is causing the conflict.

Possible causes may include:

• unclear responsibilities;
• competing priorities;
• communication problems;
• perceived unfairness;
• management style;
• workload;
• personality differences;
• previous unresolved disagreements; or
• inappropriate behaviour.

Once the underlying issue is understood, the employer can determine whether management intervention, mediation or a formal process is appropriate.

Allowing workplace conflict to continue without intervention can affect performance, attendance and employee retention and may eventually result in formal complaints.

6. Bullying at Work

Allegations of bullying should be taken seriously.

Employees may use the term "bullying" to describe a wide range of workplace experiences, from persistent intimidating or humiliating behaviour through to legitimate management action that the employee strongly disagrees with.

Employers should focus on the specific behaviour alleged rather than becoming preoccupied initially with whether a particular label applies.

Relevant questions may include:

• what happened;
• when it occurred;
• who was involved;
• whether there were witnesses;
• whether there is documentary or digital evidence;
• whether similar incidents have occurred before; and
• what effect the behaviour had in the workplace.

Managers should also avoid assuming that legitimate performance management cannot be challenged as bullying. Managers are entitled to set standards and address performance concerns, but the manner in which this is done remains relevant.

Where allegations are sufficiently serious or disputed, an investigation may be required.

7. Harassment and Discrimination Concerns

Complaints involving harassment or discrimination can carry significant legal risk.

An employee may allege that they have been treated differently because of a protected characteristic, subjected to unwanted conduct or disadvantaged by a workplace decision, policy or practice.

These concerns may arise during apparently unrelated management processes.

For example, an employee undergoing performance management may allege discriminatory treatment. An attendance-management discussion may raise disability issues. A disagreement about workplace behaviour may develop into a harassment complaint.

Managers should recognise these indicators and avoid treating the allegation merely as resistance to management action.

The employer may need to consider whether a formal grievance or investigation is required and whether any immediate steps are necessary to protect those involved while the issue is considered.

8. Preventing Sexual Harassment

Employers are subject to a statutory duty to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment of employees in the course of their employment.

This means employers should take a proactive approach rather than relying solely on responding after a complaint has been made.

Reasonable preventative steps may include:

• clear anti-harassment policies;
• effective reporting channels;
• manager and employee training;
• risk assessment;
• prompt investigation of complaints;
• monitoring known workplace risks;
• appropriate action where conduct concerns are identified; and
• reviewing whether existing preventative measures are working.

The wider statutory framework relating to workplace harassment continues to develop. Employers should therefore ensure that their policies and training reflect the current legal position and should review arrangements where legislative requirements change.

9. Complaints About Managers

Employee complaints about managers can be particularly difficult to handle.

The manager may ordinarily be responsible for addressing employee concerns but cannot always be expected to investigate objectively a complaint about their own behaviour.

Employers should therefore have an alternative escalation route.

Depending on the seriousness and nature of the allegation, the matter may need to be handled by:

• HR;
• another manager;
• senior management; or
• an independent investigator.

Care should also be taken where the manager remains responsible for the employee's day-to-day work while the complaint is being considered.

The employer may need to determine whether temporary management arrangements are appropriate without unnecessarily disrupting the employment relationship or prejudging the complaint.

10. Workplace Investigations

Some employee concerns cannot reasonably be resolved without establishing what happened.

A workplace investigation may involve:

• interviewing the person raising the concern;
• speaking with the employee or manager complained about;
• interviewing witnesses;
• reviewing emails or messages;
• examining relevant documents;
• considering workplace records;
• reviewing CCTV or other lawfully obtained evidence; and
• assessing other available evidence.

The scope of the investigation should reflect the allegations.

Employers should avoid allowing investigations to expand indefinitely into every historical disagreement between the parties unless those matters are genuinely relevant.

The investigator should approach the evidence objectively and distinguish between established facts, disputed accounts and unsupported allegations.

Once sufficient information has been gathered, the organisation can decide what process or action should follow.

11. Mediation

Mediation can sometimes help resolve workplace conflict where the principal problem is the relationship between individuals rather than an allegation requiring disciplinary determination.

It may allow employees to discuss concerns, understand different perspectives and agree practical arrangements for working together.

Mediation will not be appropriate in every situation.

It should not normally be used as a substitute for investigating serious allegations simply because the employer wants the parties to move on.

The suitability of mediation will depend on the nature of the dispute, the willingness of those involved to participate and whether an informal resolution remains realistic.

12. Whistleblowing Concerns

Managers should be able to recognise when an employee's complaint may involve whistleblowing.

An employee may not use the term "whistleblowing" or refer to a protected disclosure. They may simply report suspected wrongdoing, legal breaches, safety concerns or other matters they believe require attention.

Employers should therefore consider the substance of what has been raised rather than relying on how the employee has labelled the complaint.

A concern may also contain both personal grievance and wider whistleblowing elements.

For example, an employee might complain about how they have personally been treated while also alleging that the organisation is breaching legal, regulatory or safety requirements.

Those elements may require different consideration.

13. Avoiding Retaliation and Victimisation

Employers should be alert to how an employee is treated after raising a workplace concern.

Managers or colleagues may become frustrated with an employee who has complained, particularly where the allegations are serious or affect working relationships.

Subsequent management decisions should continue to be based on legitimate reasons.

An employee raising a grievance or other complaint does not prevent the employer from managing genuine performance, attendance or conduct concerns. However, employers should be able to demonstrate that any subsequent action is based on those concerns rather than the fact that the employee complained.

Particular legal protections may apply where complaints concern discrimination, harassment, whistleblowing, health and safety or other protected matters.

Managers should therefore avoid comments, decisions or conduct that could reasonably suggest retaliation for raising concerns.

14. Grievances Raised During Other HR Procedures

Employees sometimes raise grievances while another management process is already underway.

For example, an employee facing disciplinary action may complain about their manager, or an employee undergoing performance management may allege that the process is discriminatory.

The existence of a grievance does not necessarily mean the other process must automatically stop.

The employer should consider the relationship between the two matters.

In some cases, the issues may be capable of being considered concurrently. In others, the grievance may raise matters that need to be investigated before the original process can fairly continue.

The employer may need to consider:

• whether the grievance concerns the manager running the existing process;
• whether it challenges the evidence being relied upon;
• whether discrimination or whistleblowing is alleged;
• whether the grievance could materially affect the fairness of the existing process; and
• whether different decision-makers should be appointed.

Employers should avoid adopting a rigid rule. The appropriate approach will depend on what has been alleged and how it affects the existing process.

15. Restoring Working Relationships

Resolving a formal complaint does not necessarily resolve the underlying workplace relationship.

An employee whose grievance is not upheld may still need to work with the manager they complained about. Colleagues involved in an investigation may remain part of the same team. A manager may need to continue supervising an employee after a difficult dispute.

Employers should therefore consider what happens after the immediate process ends.

This might involve:

• clarifying responsibilities;
• agreeing communication arrangements;
• management support;
• mediation;
• team intervention;
• training;
• monitoring workplace behaviour; or
• reviewing reporting arrangements.

The objective should be to restore a workable professional relationship where reasonably possible.

16. Maintaining Confidentiality

Workplace complaints frequently involve sensitive information.

Employers should handle information on an appropriate need-to-know basis and should avoid unnecessary disclosure of allegations, medical information or personal details.

Absolute confidentiality cannot always be guaranteed. An investigation may require allegations or evidence to be put to another employee so that they have a fair opportunity to respond.

Managers should therefore avoid promising that information will never be shared where that may not be realistic.

Instead, employees should be told that information will be handled appropriately and shared only where reasonably necessary for the employer to address the issue.

17. Protecting Employees During an Ongoing Dispute

In some cases, temporary arrangements may be needed while a workplace dispute is being investigated or managed.

Possible steps might include:

• temporary changes to reporting arrangements;
• changes to working locations;
• temporary changes to duties;
• instructions limiting unnecessary contact between individuals;
• management supervision; or
• other proportionate measures intended to protect the integrity of the process and workplace relationships.

Employers should avoid using temporary measures in a way that appears to punish the complainant or prejudge the person complained about.

The purpose should be to manage workplace risk while the underlying facts are established.

18. When External or Independent Investigation May Be Appropriate

Most workplace investigations can be handled internally where the organisation has suitably experienced and sufficiently independent personnel.

External investigation may nevertheless be appropriate where:

• the allegations concern senior leadership;
• HR personnel are directly involved;
• the organisation lacks an appropriately independent investigator;
• the allegations are particularly serious or sensitive;
• several senior employees are involved;
• confidence in the internal process has materially deteriorated; or
• the employer requires specialist investigative expertise.

An external investigator does not remove the employer's responsibility for the eventual employment decision. The organisation should remain clear about the investigator's role, scope and reporting arrangements.

19. When Specialist Advice Is Needed

Workplace relationship issues can become particularly difficult where allegations are serious, senior employees are involved or confidence in the internal process has deteriorated.

Specialist HR or legal support may be appropriate where:

• serious discrimination or harassment is alleged;
• sexual harassment is alleged;
• a grievance concerns senior management;
• whistleblowing is involved;
• several employees are making related allegations;
• an investigation is likely to be complex;
• the internal HR team is directly involved in the dispute;
• disciplinary action may follow the investigation;
• relationships have broken down significantly; or
• Employment Tribunal proceedings are threatened.

Early external intervention can sometimes help the employer retain control of the situation before positions become entrenched.

The overall aim when managing employee concerns should be to create a credible route for issues to be raised, establish the relevant facts and respond proportionately. Employers should neither formalise every workplace disagreement unnecessarily nor minimise serious concerns that require proper investigation and action.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section I: Managing Different Employee Circumstances

Employees' circumstances can change throughout the employment relationship. Health conditions may develop, caring responsibilities may increase, an employee may become pregnant or request a different working arrangement, or personal circumstances may begin affecting how they work.

Employers do not necessarily need to accommodate every request or change normal management expectations whenever personal circumstances arise. They do, however, need to recognise when an apparently routine management decision engages statutory employment rights, discrimination risk or duties to consider reasonable adjustments.

The appropriate response should therefore take account of both the needs of the organisation and the individual circumstances of the employee.

1. Flexible Working

Employees may request changes to when, where or how they work.

A flexible working request might involve:

• different start or finish times;
• reduced hours;
• compressed hours;
• different working days;
• home or hybrid working;
• job sharing; or
• another change to the employee's working pattern.

Employers should distinguish informal discussions about working arrangements from requests that engage the statutory flexible working framework.

Managers should avoid making immediate commitments or rejecting requests without understanding the circumstances and the applicable process.

Where a change is agreed, employers should also be clear whether it is permanent, temporary or subject to review and whether contractual documentation needs to be updated.

2. Pregnancy and Maternity

Pregnancy requires particular care in employee management.

Managers may need to consider:

• health and safety;
• pregnancy-related sickness absence;
• time off for antenatal appointments;
• working arrangements;
• communication during maternity leave;
• return-to-work arrangements; and
• the effect of organisational change or redundancy.

Ordinary management processes can become more sensitive where pregnancy is relevant.

For example, an employee may already be undergoing performance management when the employer becomes aware that they are pregnant. The pregnancy does not necessarily prevent legitimate performance management from continuing, but the employer should ensure that its decisions are not influenced unlawfully by the pregnancy and should consider whether pregnancy-related circumstances are relevant to the issues being managed.

Managers should understand that pregnancy and maternity attract specific legal protections and should seek HR support where significant employment decisions are being considered.

3. Family-Related Responsibilities

Employees may have statutory rights connected with childbirth, adoption and family responsibilities.

Depending on the circumstances, these can include rights associated with:

• maternity leave;
• paternity leave;
• adoption leave;
• shared parental arrangements;
• parental leave;
• carer's leave;
• time off for dependants; and
• other statutory family-related protections.

Managers should know where to refer employees for information about the relevant policy and should avoid treating legitimate use of family-related rights as evidence of poor commitment or unreliability.

Operational difficulties may still need to be managed. The organisation may need to arrange temporary cover, redistribute work or plan for an employee's return.

Good workforce planning can help employers manage these periods without allowing legitimate operational concerns to affect the employee's treatment unfairly.

4. Caring Responsibilities

Employees may have responsibility for children, elderly relatives, disabled family members or others who depend on them.

Caring responsibilities can sometimes lead to requests for flexible working, periods of leave or unexpected time away from work.

Employers should identify what the employee is actually requesting and which workplace policy or statutory framework may apply.

Managers should avoid assuming that all caring situations should be handled in the same way. Different rights and processes may apply depending on the nature of the absence or request.

Where longer-term changes are sought, the employer may need to consider whether a flexible working arrangement or another agreed change provides a sustainable solution.

5. Health Conditions

Health issues can affect attendance, performance, working hours, behaviour or an employee's ability to carry out particular duties.

Where a manager becomes aware of a health issue, the first question should not automatically be whether the employee can continue in employment.

The employer may need further information to understand:

• how the condition affects the employee;
• whether it affects particular duties;
• whether the impact is temporary or longer term;
• whether medical advice is required;
• whether workplace factors are contributing to the problem; and
• whether adjustments could assist.

The appropriate management response will depend on the circumstances.

Managers should also be careful about seeking unnecessary medical information. The employer generally needs information relevant to managing the employment relationship rather than unrestricted details about an employee's medical history.

6. Disability and Reasonable Adjustments

Where an employee is disabled for employment law purposes, the employer may have a duty to consider reasonable adjustments.

The need for adjustments can arise in many different management contexts.

An employee may experience difficulties performing particular duties, have increased absence, struggle with a workplace process or be disadvantaged by particular working arrangements.

Potential adjustments will depend on the individual circumstances and might involve changes to:

• working hours;
• duties;
• equipment;
• physical workplace arrangements;
• communication methods;
• supervision;
• workplace processes;
• training;
• targets; or
• other aspects of the employee's work.

There is no universal adjustment that will be appropriate for every employee with a particular condition.

The employer should understand the disadvantage experienced by the individual and consider what reasonable steps could address it.

7. Neurodiversity

Neurodiversity can become relevant to employee management in areas such as communication, concentration, sensory environment, organisation, time management and working methods.

Employees may identify as autistic, have ADHD, dyslexia or another neurodivergent condition, although the impact on work will vary considerably between individuals.

Managers should avoid making assumptions about an employee's abilities or needs based simply on a diagnosis or label.

Where an employee identifies a difficulty, the employer should seek to understand how it affects them in their particular role and whether practical changes may help.

Depending on the circumstances, neurodivergence may also engage disability protections and the duty to consider reasonable adjustments.

This can become particularly important where concerns about performance, conduct or communication may be connected with the employee's condition.

8. Religion or Belief

Employee management decisions may sometimes interact with religious or philosophical beliefs.

Issues can arise in relation to:

• working hours;
• dress;
• religious observance;
• workplace facilities;
• particular duties; or
• interactions between employees holding different beliefs.

Employers should consider requests and workplace issues objectively rather than making assumptions about what an employee's religion or belief requires.

There may be circumstances where an employer cannot accommodate a particular request because of legitimate operational requirements. However, the reasons for the decision and any potential discrimination implications should be considered carefully.

Managers also need to maintain appropriate workplace standards where disagreements between employees concern religion, belief or other protected matters.

9. Different Communication and Management Needs

Employees do not necessarily respond to management in the same way.

Some employees may work effectively with substantial autonomy, while others benefit from more regular direction. Some may prefer written instructions for complex tasks, while others respond better to discussion.

Adapting management style does not necessarily mean changing the required performance standard.

It can mean communicating or supporting employees in a way that gives them a reasonable opportunity to achieve that standard.

Where a particular management approach is required because of disability or another legally relevant circumstance, the issue may extend beyond management preference and require consideration as a reasonable adjustment.

10. Personal Circumstances Affecting Work

Employees may experience bereavement, relationship breakdown, financial difficulties, family problems or other personal events that affect their work.

Employers are not responsible for resolving every aspect of an employee's personal life, but managers should be capable of responding appropriately where personal circumstances begin affecting attendance, performance or behaviour.

Depending on the circumstances, temporary flexibility, leave, an employee assistance programme or another form of support may be appropriate.

Managers should still maintain appropriate boundaries and remain clear about workplace expectations.

The objective is to determine whether a reasonable short-term intervention can help the employee while ensuring that operational requirements continue to be managed.

11. Avoiding Assumptions

One of the principal risks when managing different employee circumstances is assumption.

Managers may assume that an employee with young children will not want additional responsibility, that an older employee will be less interested in training, that a disabled employee cannot undertake particular duties or that someone with caring responsibilities will be unreliable.

Even where intended sympathetically, assumptions can result in inappropriate and potentially discriminatory decisions.

Management decisions should therefore be based on relevant information and discussion with the employee rather than stereotypes about particular groups or circumstances.

12. Applying Standards While Considering Individual Circumstances

Considering an employee's individual circumstances does not mean employers cannot maintain workplace standards.

Employees can still be expected to perform their roles, behave appropriately and comply with reasonable workplace requirements.

The management question is whether there is a relevant circumstance that should affect how the standard is applied or how the employee is supported in meeting it.

For example, an employer may legitimately require an employee to perform the essential requirements of their role while also considering whether reasonable adjustments would enable a disabled employee to do so.

Similarly, operational requirements may limit the extent to which a flexible working request can be accommodated, but the request should still be considered through the appropriate process.

13. Redundancy Protection During Pregnancy and Family Leave

Particular protection can apply where an employee is affected by redundancy during pregnancy or within a protected period connected with certain forms of family leave.

Where an employee falls within the statutory redundancy protection regime and a suitable alternative vacancy is available, they may have priority entitlement to be offered that vacancy rather than simply being required to compete for it alongside other employees.

The protected period can extend beyond the period of leave itself and, depending on the circumstances, may continue for up to 18 months from the relevant birth, placement or other statutory reference point.

Employers should therefore identify at an early stage whether any employee affected by redundancy falls within a protected category.

This is not simply an equality consideration. It can affect the employer's obligations when considering suitable alternative employment.

Where pregnancy or family-related leave overlaps with restructuring or redundancy, specialist HR advice should be obtained before final decisions are made.

14. Recognising When Specialist Advice Is Needed

Individual employee circumstances can significantly alter the risk associated with an otherwise routine management decision.

Employers should consider taking HR or legal advice where:

• disability may be relevant to performance or attendance;
• reasonable adjustments are disputed or difficult to identify;
• pregnancy or maternity coincides with a significant employment decision;
• redundancy affects an employee within a protected pregnancy or family-leave period;
• a flexible working request raises complex operational issues;
• an employee alleges discrimination;
• religious or belief-related issues are creating workplace conflict;
• family-related rights are disputed;
• an employee's health may affect their ability to remain in their role; or
• dismissal or another significant decision is being considered.

The central principle is that effective employee management combines consistent organisational standards with consideration of relevant individual circumstances.

Employers do not need to abandon legitimate management objectives when an employee's circumstances change. They do need to identify when those circumstances affect how a decision should be made, what process should be followed or what support should reasonably be considered.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section J: Managing Difficult Employee Situations

Some employee issues do not fit neatly into a single HR category. Performance, conduct, attendance and workplace relationship problems can overlap, employees may challenge management decisions, and several processes may become active at the same time.

These situations can be difficult because the employer still needs to manage the employee and maintain normal business operations while ensuring that decisions are fair, evidence-based and legally defensible.

The starting point should be to identify the actual issue rather than immediately deciding which formal procedure to use.

A practical approach is to:

identify the concern establish the relevant facts understand the employee's position identify any legal or procedural risks determine the appropriate management process document decisions review and escalate where necessary.

1. Repeated Underperformance

An employee may continue to underperform despite previous discussions, additional support or performance improvement measures.

Where this happens, managers should review what has already been done before simply repeating the same informal intervention.

Relevant questions include:

• Has the required performance standard been clearly explained?
• Has the employee been given specific examples of the shortfall?
• Has the cause of the performance problem been explored?
• Has reasonable support or training been provided?
• Has sufficient time been allowed for improvement?
• Has the employee actually improved in some areas?
• Are health or disability issues relevant?
• Have previous discussions been documented?

If informal management has been exhausted without sufficient improvement, a formal capability or performance process may be appropriate.

Employers should avoid allowing repeated informal warnings to continue indefinitely. This can create uncertainty for the employee and make it harder for the organisation to demonstrate when and why the matter eventually became formal.

2. Persistent Short-Term Absence

Repeated short-term absence can create significant operational problems, particularly where other employees are required to provide cover.

The employer should establish the employee's attendance history and discuss the pattern with them rather than assuming that repeated absence is illegitimate.

There may be an underlying medical condition, disability, pregnancy-related issue or another explanation requiring further consideration.

Where no such explanation accounts for the attendance level, the employer may need to explain that attendance has become a management concern and establish how the position will be reviewed.

The focus should be on the overall sustainability of attendance rather than attempting to challenge whether the employee was genuinely ill on every individual occasion.

3. Refusal to Follow Management Instructions

Employees are generally expected to follow reasonable management instructions connected with their employment.

Where an employee refuses, the manager should first understand why.

The employee may have misunderstood the instruction, believe it falls outside their role, consider it unsafe, argue that it conflicts with a contractual term or raise another concern about what they are being asked to do.

The employer should assess whether the instruction is reasonable and whether the employee has a legitimate explanation for refusing it.

If an employee deliberately refuses a reasonable instruction without adequate justification, the issue may become one of conduct.

Managers should avoid immediately characterising disagreement as insubordination without understanding the circumstances.

4. Breakdown in the Relationship Between Employee and Manager

The relationship between an employee and their manager can deteriorate to the point where ordinary management becomes difficult.

This may follow a performance process, grievance, personality conflict, disagreement about working arrangements or a series of smaller incidents.

The employer should identify what has caused the breakdown and whether the relationship can realistically be repaired.

Possible interventions may include:

• facilitated discussions;
• mediation;
• clarification of roles and expectations;
• HR involvement;
• changes to communication arrangements;
• management coaching; or
• changes to reporting arrangements where operationally appropriate.

Changing the employee's manager should not automatically be regarded as the solution. It may simply transfer the underlying problem elsewhere and may not be practical.

Equally, employers should not assume that a damaged relationship inevitably requires someone to leave the organisation.

5. Conflict Between Colleagues

Persistent conflict between employees can affect the wider team even where neither employee has committed obvious misconduct.

Managers should avoid allowing disputes to continue simply because both individuals are performing their technical roles.

The employer may need to understand what is driving the conflict and establish expectations for professional behaviour.

Employees do not have to like each other, but they can generally be expected to maintain a workable professional relationship.

Where specific allegations of bullying, harassment or misconduct are made, the matter may require formal investigation rather than simply being treated as a personality clash.

6. Employee Accused of Serious Misconduct

Serious allegations can create immediate pressure on managers to act.

Colleagues may expect the employee to be removed from the workplace, senior management may be concerned about business risk and the allegation itself may appear convincing.

The employer should nevertheless avoid prejudging the outcome.

Immediate steps may be required to protect employees, evidence, customers or business operations, but these should be distinguished from the eventual disciplinary decision.

The organisation should determine:

• what has been alleged;
• what evidence currently exists;
• whether immediate protective measures are required;
• whether suspension is necessary;
• who should investigate;
• whether witnesses need to be interviewed;
• whether electronic or documentary evidence should be preserved; and
• whether any external reporting obligations arise.

The seriousness of the allegation generally increases rather than reduces the importance of a credible process.

7. Employee Posting Inappropriate Material Online

Social media and other online activity can create difficult questions about the boundary between employees' private lives and the employment relationship.

An employer may become aware that an employee has posted offensive material, criticised the organisation, discussed colleagues or customers, disclosed information or published content considered inconsistent with their role.

Before acting, the employer should establish what was actually posted and the context in which it appeared.

Relevant considerations may include:

• whether the account can reliably be attributed to the employee;
• whether the employer is identified;
• whether colleagues or customers are involved;
• whether confidential information has been disclosed;
• whether workplace policies apply;
• whether the content affects the employee's role;
• whether there is evidence of actual workplace impact; and
• whether legal protections may be relevant.

Employers should avoid assuming that anything controversial posted by an employee automatically becomes a disciplinary matter.

8. Employee Facing Criminal Allegations

Criminal allegations outside work can create operational, reputational, regulatory or safeguarding concerns.

An employer should not automatically treat an arrest or criminal charge as proof that misconduct occurred.

Instead, it should consider how the circumstances relate to the employee's role and whether they affect the employment relationship.

For example, allegations may be particularly relevant where the employee works with vulnerable individuals, holds a regulated position, drives as part of their role or has access to money or sensitive information.

The employer may also need to decide whether an internal process can proceed while a police investigation or criminal case remains ongoing.

These situations can require careful handling because the information available to the employer may be limited.

9. Employee Refusing Workplace Changes

Business requirements can change and employers may need employees to work differently.

An employee may object to changes involving duties, location, hours, reporting arrangements, working methods or other aspects of their employment.

Managers should establish the contractual and practical position before treating refusal as a conduct issue.

Relevant questions may include whether the employer has a contractual right to make the change, whether employee agreement is required, whether consultation has taken place and whether the change has a particular impact on the individual.

Where the employee has a legitimate contractual or statutory objection, disciplinary action may be inappropriate.

Where the instruction falls within the employer's legitimate management authority and the employee refuses without adequate justification, conduct issues may potentially arise.

10. Employee Raising Repeated Complaints

Some employees raise several complaints over time or challenge multiple management decisions.

Employers should resist the temptation to dismiss later concerns simply because earlier complaints were not upheld.

Each issue should be assessed sufficiently to determine whether it raises something requiring action.

At the same time, employers do not necessarily need to repeatedly investigate matters that have already been properly considered where no materially new information has been provided.

Clear communication can be important. The employer should explain what has already been determined, what new issues will be considered and which matters are regarded as concluded.

Particular care is required where complaints may involve discrimination, whistleblowing or other protected rights.

11. Employee Raising a Grievance During Performance or Disciplinary Action

A grievance raised during another HR process can create procedural complexity.

The employee may allege that the manager conducting performance management is bullying them, that disciplinary allegations are discriminatory or that action is being taken because they previously raised concerns.

The employer should consider the substance of the grievance and its relationship with the existing process.

It may sometimes be possible for both matters to continue concurrently. In other circumstances, issues raised in the grievance may need to be investigated before the original process can safely proceed.

The existence of a grievance should not automatically prevent legitimate management action, but neither should it be ignored because another procedure has already started.

12. Employee Absent During an HR Process

An employee may become unwell while a disciplinary, grievance, performance or other formal process is underway.

Employers should avoid assuming either that the process must stop indefinitely or that the employee's absence can simply be disregarded.

The organisation may need to understand whether the employee is medically capable of participating and whether adjustments to the process could assist.

Depending on the circumstances, this might involve:

• changing the meeting format;
• allowing additional time;
• obtaining medical information;
• adjusting the location;
• allowing written representations; or
• considering another reasonable arrangement.

There may ultimately be situations where a process has to proceed despite the employee's continuing absence, but the employer should be able to demonstrate that it considered how the employee could participate fairly.

13. Employee Threatening Legal Proceedings

Employees sometimes refer to solicitors, ACAS, Employment Tribunals or legal proceedings during workplace disputes.

Managers should not react defensively or allow the threat itself to determine how the employee is subsequently treated.

The underlying employment issue still needs to be managed.

The employer should ensure that relevant documents are preserved, that communications remain professional and that significant decisions are properly reasoned and recorded.

The fact that litigation has been threatened may also make it appropriate to obtain specialist advice before taking further action.

Managers should avoid making speculative admissions or attempting to debate complex legal issues directly with the employee.

14. Employee Refusing to Attend Meetings

Employees may refuse to attend management or HR meetings for a variety of reasons.

The employer should establish why the employee is refusing.

There may be concerns about health, representation, the identity of the manager conducting the meeting, the proposed format or the fairness of the process.

Where there is a reasonable concern, it may be possible to address it without abandoning the meeting.

If the employee continues to refuse to participate without adequate reason, the employer may eventually need to make decisions based on the information available.

Before doing so, the organisation should ensure the employee has been given a reasonable opportunity to engage.

15. Several Problems Arising at Once

The most difficult employee cases often involve several issues simultaneously.

An employee may be absent with stress while undergoing performance management, raise a grievance against their manager, allege disability discrimination and subsequently refuse to attend meetings.

Treating each development as an entirely separate problem can result in fragmented and contradictory decision-making.

The employer should instead map the issues and understand how they interact.

This may involve identifying:

What is the original management concern?

What additional issues have subsequently arisen?

Which matters require investigation?

Which statutory protections may be relevant?

Can processes run concurrently?

Who should make each decision?

What evidence is required?

What should happen next?

Complex cases may benefit from a single HR strategy setting out how the different strands will be managed.

16. Avoiding Predetermined Outcomes

Difficult employee situations can be frustrating for managers, particularly where a problem has continued for a long period.

This can lead to conversations internally about simply wanting the employee "out" or deciding that dismissal is inevitable before the relevant process has concluded.

Such thinking can undermine subsequent decision-making and create damaging documentation.

Managers should distinguish between recognising that dismissal is a possible outcome and deciding in advance that dismissal will occur.

Where a formal process is intended to determine an outcome, the organisation should remain open to the evidence and the employee's response.

17. Constructive Dismissal Risk in Difficult Employee Situations

Employers should also be alert to the risk that the manner in which a difficult employee situation is handled may itself create contractual risk.

Constructive dismissal claims can arise where an employee resigns and alleges that the employer committed a sufficiently serious breach of contract entitling them to treat the employment relationship as terminated.

Not every unreasonable management decision, disagreement or contractual breach will amount to constructive dismissal. The legal threshold is fact-sensitive and can be complex.

However, risks may increase where employers:

• impose significant contractual changes without an appropriate basis;
• subject employees to serious or sustained unreasonable treatment;
• fail to address serious workplace complaints;
• undermine an employee's role or status without justification;
• act in a way that fundamentally damages the employment relationship; or
• allow a series of serious management failures to accumulate.

Where a difficult employee situation has developed into a serious contractual dispute or the employee is threatening resignation in response to the employer's conduct, specialist advice should be considered before further action is taken.

18. Keeping Control of Complex Employee Issues

Employers can lose control of difficult employee situations when action becomes reactive.

A new complaint triggers one response, an absence triggers another and correspondence from the employee leads to further management decisions without an overall strategy.

A more structured approach is to identify the issues, decide who is responsible for each element and establish the sequence in which decisions need to be made.

HR should maintain oversight where several processes overlap.

External advice may also be appropriate where internal relationships have become strained or the potential legal exposure is significant.

Difficult employees and difficult employee situations are not necessarily the same thing. Employers should avoid attaching labels to individuals and instead focus on the specific behaviours, performance concerns, workplace circumstances or employment issues that need to be managed.

This keeps the process centred on evidence and legitimate organisational concerns while reducing the risk that frustration with an individual begins to influence employment decisions.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section K: Informal Management or Formal HR Procedure?

One of the most important decisions when managing employees is determining whether an issue should be handled through ordinary management or a formal HR procedure.

Employers should not formalise every minor workplace problem. Doing so can damage working relationships, discourage straightforward management conversations and create unnecessary procedural complexity. Equally, managers should not continue dealing informally with a serious or persistent problem when a structured process is required.

The appropriate approach depends on the nature of the issue, its seriousness, the employee's history, previous management action and any wider legal or workplace risks.

1. When Informal Management May Be Appropriate

Informal management will often be appropriate where a concern is relatively minor, has arisen for the first time and appears capable of being corrected through straightforward management intervention.

Examples may include:

• an isolated performance problem;
• a minor failure to follow a procedure;
• occasional lateness;
• a relatively minor workplace disagreement;
• an unclear expectation;
• a communication problem;
• a minor behavioural concern; or
• another issue where early intervention is likely to resolve the problem.

An informal conversation allows the manager to explain the concern, understand the employee's position and clarify what needs to change without immediately invoking a formal procedure.

Informal does not mean insignificant. A clear management conversation can establish expectations and make the employee aware that continued problems may result in further action.

2. What an Informal Management Conversation Should Cover

An effective informal conversation should generally be specific and constructive.

The manager may need to explain:

• what has caused concern;
• the examples or evidence supporting that concern;
• the standard expected;
• why the issue matters;
• what the employee says about the situation;
• whether there is an underlying problem;
• what improvement or change is required;
• what support will be provided;
• when the position will be reviewed; and
• what may happen if the problem continues.

The employee should have an opportunity to respond.

This can reveal information that materially changes the appropriate management response. What appears to be a simple performance problem may involve inadequate training, conflicting instructions, disability, health difficulties or another workplace issue.

3. Documented Informal Management

Informal management does not mean that no record should ever be made.

Where the issue is significant enough that recurrence could result in formal action, a proportionate management record can help establish what was discussed.

The record might include:

• the date;
• the concern discussed;
• the employee's explanation;
• the standard expected;
• support agreed;
• the action required; and
• the proposed review date.

It may also be appropriate to confirm the main points to the employee in writing.

Employers should distinguish this type of management record from a formal disciplinary or capability warning. An employer should not describe a measure as "informal" while attempting to give it the status and consequences of a formal sanction.

4. When Formal Action May Be Required

A formal procedure may become appropriate where the seriousness, persistence or nature of an issue means that ordinary management is no longer sufficient.

Potential triggers include:

• performance failing to improve despite previous management intervention;
• repeated attendance concerns;
• alleged misconduct;
• potential gross misconduct;
• a formal grievance;
• serious bullying or harassment allegations;
• discrimination concerns;
• significant workplace conflict;
• long-term capability concerns;
• possible redundancy;
• significant contractual change; or
• circumstances where dismissal is a potential outcome.

Serious matters do not necessarily have to pass through an informal stage before formal action can begin.

For example, a serious misconduct allegation may require immediate investigation rather than an informal warning.

5. Moving From Informal to Formal Management

Where an informal approach has failed, the employer should make the transition to formal management clear.

The employee should understand that the issue has progressed beyond ordinary management and that a formal procedure is now being used.

This may involve explaining:

• what concerns remain;
• what previous management action has taken place;
• why the matter is now being handled formally;
• which procedure applies;
• what will happen next; and
• what potential outcomes may arise.

Employers should avoid creating a blurred process in which an employee does not know whether a meeting is an ordinary management discussion or a formal hearing capable of resulting in a sanction.

6. Choosing the Correct HR Procedure

Once formal action becomes necessary, the employer should identify the procedure that most appropriately reflects the issue.

Depending on the circumstances, this might involve:

• a performance or capability procedure;
• a disciplinary procedure;
• a sickness or medical capability procedure;
• a grievance procedure;
• a workplace investigation;
• a redundancy consultation;
• a contractual change process; or
• another appropriate HR procedure.

The label should follow the substance of the problem.

Employers should not use disciplinary procedures merely because they provide a convenient route towards dismissal where the genuine issue is capability, sickness absence or organisational change.

Similarly, an employee who deliberately refuses a reasonable instruction may present a conduct issue rather than a performance problem.

7. Establishing the Facts Before Formal Decisions

Formal action should be based on sufficient information to allow a reasonable decision to be made.

The level of investigation required will depend on the issue.

A disputed misconduct allegation may require witness interviews and documentary evidence. A performance case may require examples of work, performance data and records of previous support. A sickness capability case may require medical or occupational health evidence.

Employers should identify what information is genuinely needed rather than either making decisions on assumption or allowing an investigation to become unnecessarily extensive.

8. Formal Meetings and the Opportunity to Respond

Formal procedures should provide employees with an appropriate opportunity to understand the issue and respond before significant decisions are made.

Depending on the procedure, this may involve:

• written notification of the issue;
• appropriate disclosure of relevant information;
• a formal meeting or hearing;
• an opportunity for the employee to explain their position;
• consideration of evidence and mitigation;
• a reasoned decision; and
• an appeal where applicable.

Applicable statutory rights concerning accompaniment should also be respected where they arise.

The employer's own procedure and relevant ACAS guidance should be considered when determining how the process should operate.

9. The ACAS Code

The ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures is particularly important where employers are dealing with formal disciplinary and grievance matters.

The Code sets out principles of reasonable handling, including establishing the facts, informing employees of the problem, allowing employees to respond and providing appropriate opportunities to appeal.

Employment Tribunals can take the Code into account in relevant proceedings.

Where a claim to which the Code applies succeeds, an unreasonable failure to comply with the Code can result in compensation being adjusted by up to 25%.

Employers should therefore ensure managers involved in formal disciplinary and grievance procedures understand the applicable ACAS requirements rather than relying solely on internal policy.

10. Appeals

An appeal can provide an important opportunity to identify and correct problems with an earlier formal decision.

Depending on the circumstances, an employee may challenge:

• the factual findings;
• the procedure followed;
• the sanction imposed;
• the treatment of particular evidence;
• the failure to consider mitigation; or
• new evidence that was not previously available.

Where reasonably practicable, an appeal should be considered by someone who was not responsible for the original decision.

The appropriate scope of the appeal will depend on the grounds raised and the organisation's procedure.

11. When HR Processes Overlap

Employee issues do not always remain within one procedure.

A capability process may reveal a health condition. A disciplinary process may trigger a grievance. An absence case may involve disability. A grievance may contain whistleblowing allegations. Organisational change may coincide with maternity leave or long-term sickness absence.

Employers should identify the different issues and determine how they interact rather than assuming that one procedure automatically takes priority over every other consideration.

Questions may include:

• Can the processes continue concurrently?
• Does one issue need to be resolved before another?
• Should different managers handle different elements?
• Does new evidence affect the existing process?
• Are statutory protections engaged?
• Are reasonable adjustments to the process required?
• Does HR need to coordinate the overall strategy?

Complex overlapping processes are a common point at which specialist HR advice becomes valuable.

12. Adjusting HR Procedures Where Appropriate

Formal procedures should be sufficiently robust to protect fairness, but employers should not assume that every process must be conducted identically regardless of the employee's circumstances.

Adjustments may sometimes be appropriate where an employee has a disability, health condition or another relevant difficulty participating in the process.

Depending on the circumstances, this could involve:

• additional breaks;
• shorter meetings;
• a different meeting location;
• remote participation;
• additional time to consider documents;
• changes to communication methods; or
• other reasonable measures facilitating participation.

The substantive employment issue can still be addressed. The purpose of an adjustment is to enable the employee to participate appropriately rather than to prevent the employer from managing the issue.

13. Avoiding Unnecessary Delay

Formal HR procedures should be handled without unreasonable delay.

Delay can create several problems. Evidence may become harder to obtain, witnesses' recollections may deteriorate, employees may remain suspended or uncertain for unnecessarily long periods and workplace relationships may continue to deteriorate.

Some cases will legitimately require time, particularly where allegations are complex or several witnesses need to be interviewed.

The objective should therefore be reasonable progress rather than speed at the expense of fairness.

Where unavoidable delays occur, employers should consider keeping affected employees appropriately informed.

14. Proportionality

The seriousness of the employer's response should reflect the seriousness and circumstances of the issue.

A minor first-time problem will not ordinarily require the same process or potential sanction as serious misconduct.

Similarly, an employee who has narrowly missed a performance target may require a different management response from an employee whose performance remains substantially below standard despite extensive support.

Proportionality should influence:

• whether the matter is handled informally or formally;
• the extent of investigation;
• the level of management involvement;
• the support provided;
• the timescale for improvement;
• the sanction considered; and
• whether dismissal is a reasonable outcome.

15. Avoiding Process as a Substitute for Management Judgement

Following a procedure does not remove the need for management judgement.

A policy cannot determine automatically whether an employee's explanation is credible, whether a target was reasonable, whether an adjustment is practicable or whether dismissal is proportionate.

Managers and HR should use procedures as a framework for making informed decisions rather than treating them as a mechanical checklist designed to produce a predetermined outcome.

The employer should be able to explain both the process followed and the reasoning behind the eventual decision.

16. A Practical Escalation Model

Employers can use a simple escalation framework when deciding how an employee issue should be managed:

Stage 1  Identify the issue

What exactly is causing concern?

Stage 2  Understand the circumstances

What does the employee say, and is there an underlying explanation?

Stage 3  Assess seriousness and risk

Is this a minor management issue, a repeated problem or a potentially serious matter?

Stage 4  Consider informal intervention

Can the issue reasonably be resolved through ordinary management?

Stage 5  Identify legal or protected circumstances

Are disability, discrimination, pregnancy, whistleblowing, health and safety, family rights or other statutory protections potentially relevant?

Stage 6  Escalate where necessary

Does the matter require investigation, HR involvement or a formal procedure?

Stage 7  Follow the appropriate process

Establish the facts, allow the employee to respond and make a reasoned decision.

Stage 8  Review the outcome

Has the problem been resolved, is further monitoring required or is additional action necessary?

17. When to Take Advice Before Escalating

Employers should consider obtaining HR or legal advice before progressing where:

• dismissal is a potential outcome;
• the correct procedure is unclear;
• several HR processes overlap;
• discrimination is alleged;
• disability may affect the process;
• pregnancy or family-related rights are involved;
• whistleblowing may be relevant;
• a senior employee is involved;
• the employee has threatened legal proceedings;
• the proposed action could affect contractual rights; or
• the organisation's own procedure has not been followed correctly.

The decision between informal and formal management should ultimately be driven by the facts, seriousness and risks of the particular situation.

Employers should retain the flexibility to resolve minor issues through effective line management while having a clear route into formal HR procedures where problems become persistent, serious or legally sensitive.

 

 

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section L: Fairness & Consistency When Managing Employees

Fairness and consistency are central to effective employee management. Employers should be able to demonstrate that management decisions are based on legitimate workplace considerations, relevant evidence and the individual circumstances of the case rather than personal preference, bias or arbitrary treatment.

Consistency does not mean that every employee must always receive exactly the same treatment or outcome. Different circumstances can justify different responses. The objective is to apply a consistent decision-making framework while taking account of relevant differences between employees and situations.

This distinction is important. Mechanical consistency can itself create unfairness where materially different circumstances are treated as though they were identical.

1. What Does Consistent Employee Management Mean?

Consistency means that employees are generally managed according to common organisational standards and that comparable situations are approached using a similar decision-making framework.

This may involve consistency in:

• performance expectations;
• attendance standards;
• conduct requirements;
• application of workplace policies;
• management procedures;
• investigation of concerns;
• disciplinary decision-making;
• access to support;
• record keeping; and
• HR escalation.

Employees should not be left with materially different understandings of organisational standards simply because they report to different managers.

2. Consistency Does Not Mean Identical Treatment

Employers should avoid treating consistency as a requirement to impose exactly the same response whenever two situations appear superficially similar.

Relevant differences may include:

• the seriousness of the issue;
• the employee's explanation;
• previous management history;
• live disciplinary warnings;
• the employee's role and responsibilities;
• the consequences of the employee's actions;
• health or disability;
• pregnancy or family-related circumstances;
• mitigating factors;
• whether the employee understood the relevant requirement; and
• other material facts.

Different outcomes can therefore be consistent where the employer can identify a legitimate reason for the difference.

3. Considering the Individual Facts

Management decisions should be based on the circumstances of the particular employee and issue.

For example, two employees may have similar absence levels but very different underlying circumstances. One employee's absence may consist of unrelated short-term illnesses, while another's may be connected with disability or pregnancy.

Similarly, two employees may have breached the same workplace rule, but one may have acted deliberately while the other reasonably misunderstood an instruction.

The employer should therefore compare relevant circumstances rather than relying solely on the apparent headline similarity between cases.

4. Consistency in Performance Management

Performance expectations should be capable of objective explanation.

Managers should avoid setting substantially different standards for employees carrying out comparable work without a legitimate reason.

Where performance targets differ, the employer should be able to explain why. Differences might legitimately arise because of:

• different responsibilities;
• different levels of seniority;
• different territories or customer portfolios;
• different working hours;
• reasonable adjustments;
• temporary responsibilities; or
• other material operational factors.

Consistency also means that managers should not ignore poor performance for prolonged periods for some employees while immediately formalising relatively minor concerns involving others without an objective reason.

5. Consistency in Conduct Management

Disciplinary consistency can become particularly important where employees are accused of similar misconduct.

Employers should consider relevant previous cases when determining an appropriate response.

However, previous disciplinary decisions should not become a rigid tariff that automatically determines future outcomes.

The employer should consider whether the earlier case is genuinely comparable, including the seriousness of the conduct, circumstances, employee history, consequences and mitigation.

If employees involved in the same incident receive different sanctions, the organisation should be able to explain the material reasons for the distinction.

6. Consistency in Attendance Management

Attendance policies can provide common review points and procedures, but employers should avoid applying them without considering the reason for absence.

Particular care may be required where absence is associated with:

• disability;
• pregnancy;
• family-related rights;
• workplace injury;
• health and safety concerns; or
• another protected circumstance.

An attendance trigger can indicate that management review is required without predetermining what the outcome of that review should be.

This allows the employer to maintain organisational attendance standards while responding appropriately to individual circumstances.

7. Avoiding Manager Bias

Managers inevitably form views about the people they manage, but those views should not replace objective assessment.

Potential bias can arise where managers:

• favour employees with whom they have stronger personal relationships;
• judge employees based on personality rather than performance;
• assume motives without evidence;
• treat previous problems as proof of new allegations;
• apply stereotypes;
• respond more severely to employees who challenge them; or
• become personally invested in achieving a particular outcome.

HR oversight, evidence-based decision-making and separating investigation from decision-making where appropriate can help reduce these risks.

8. Equality and Discrimination Risk

Inconsistent management can create discrimination risk where treatment is connected with a protected characteristic or where apparently neutral management arrangements place particular groups at a disadvantage.

Managers should therefore consider not only whether they personally intend to discriminate but also whether a management decision could have a discriminatory effect.

Potential issues can arise in areas such as:

• promotion and development opportunities;
• allocation of work;
• performance assessment;
• flexible working;
• absence management;
• disciplinary action;
• redundancy selection;
• working arrangements; and
• dismissal.

Decisions should be based on legitimate and relevant considerations rather than assumptions associated with age, disability, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation or another protected characteristic.

9. Fairness During Formal Procedures

Formal procedures should provide employees with an appropriate opportunity to understand and respond to the issue being considered.

Depending on the procedure, fairness may require:

• clear notification of the concern;
• an appropriate investigation;
• access to relevant information;
• a reasonable opportunity to respond;
• consideration of the employee's explanation;
• an impartial decision-maker where appropriate;
• a reasoned outcome;
• an appeal where applicable; and
• compliance with relevant workplace procedures and the ACAS Code where it applies.

The more serious the potential outcome, the greater the importance of ensuring that the employer's decision-making process is credible and capable of later explanation.

10. Fairness Does Not Prevent Legitimate Management

Employers sometimes become reluctant to address employee problems because they are concerned that any management action could be described as unfair, discriminatory or unreasonable.

Fair management does not require employers to avoid difficult decisions.

Employees can legitimately be required to:

• perform their roles to appropriate standards;
• attend work to an acceptable level;
• follow reasonable instructions;
• comply with workplace rules;
• behave appropriately towards colleagues; and
• adapt to legitimate organisational requirements within the applicable contractual and legal framework.

The employer's task is to establish the relevant facts, consider any protected or mitigating circumstances and use an appropriate process before reaching significant decisions.

11. Explaining Management Decisions

A useful test of a management decision is whether the organisation can explain objectively why it was made.

The employer should be able to identify:

• what issue required a decision;
• what evidence was considered;
• what the employee said;
• which workplace standards or policies were relevant;
• what individual circumstances were taken into account;
• what alternatives were considered where relevant; and
• why the eventual outcome was considered appropriate.

If the principal explanation is that a manager simply disliked the employee, had "had enough" or wanted them removed from the organisation, the decision is unlikely to rest on a strong management foundation.

12. Checking Comparators

Before making significant decisions, it can be useful to consider how genuinely comparable situations have previously been handled.

This is particularly relevant in disciplinary, performance, attendance and redundancy decisions.

However, comparator analysis should be undertaken carefully.

The employer should ask:

• Were the circumstances genuinely similar?
• Was the same policy in force?
• Was the seriousness comparable?
• Did the employees have similar relevant histories?
• Were there different mitigating factors?
• Were there protected circumstances requiring different treatment?

A previous management decision should not automatically determine the current case, particularly if the previous decision itself was inappropriate.

13. Cross-Manager Consistency

Larger organisations can face particular challenges where different managers apply workplace standards differently.

HR can help identify inconsistent practices across teams and provide a common framework for management decisions.

Useful measures can include:

• central HR policies;
• manager training;
• HR review of formal sanctions;
• standard documentation;
• central records of formal cases;
• management guidance; and
• periodic review of employee-relations trends.

The objective is not to remove management discretion but to ensure that discretion operates within a coherent organisational framework.

14. Documenting Reasons for Different Treatment

Where employees in apparently similar situations receive different outcomes, employers should consider recording why.

For example, one employee may receive a warning while another is dismissed because the latter has an existing live warning, the misconduct is materially more serious or there are significant differences in the evidence.

A contemporaneous explanation can be important if the difference is later challenged.

Managers should avoid attempting to construct an explanation retrospectively after an employee has alleged unfair or discriminatory treatment.

15. Reviewing Decisions Before Significant Action

Before taking significant action such as a final warning, dismissal, major contractual change or redundancy decision, employers should consider whether an appropriate review has taken place.

The review may ask:

• Is the evidence sufficient?
• Has the employee been heard?
• Has the correct process been followed?
• Are relevant policies being applied consistently?
• Are protected circumstances involved?
• Have reasonable adjustments been considered where required?
• Are there relevant comparable cases?
• Is the proposed outcome proportionate?
• Has the decision already been improperly predetermined?
• Can the organisation explain why this outcome is appropriate?

This type of review can identify problems before they become embedded in a final decision.

16. The Defensibility Test

A practical way to assess employee-management decisions is to consider whether the organisation would be comfortable explaining the decision to an independent third party.

This could include:

• HR;
• senior management;
• an external adviser;
• ACAS;
• a regulator; or
• an Employment Tribunal.

The employer should be able to show what happened, what evidence was available, what the employee said, what factors were considered and why the decision was reached.

This does not mean that every management decision should be approached as though litigation is inevitable. It means that significant decisions should be capable of objective explanation if they are later scrutinised.

Fairness and consistency ultimately support both effective people management and organisational decision-making. Employees are more likely to understand management action where standards are clear and decisions can be explained, while employers are better positioned to manage difficult issues confidently where their approach is evidence-based, proportionate and consistent.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section M: Documentation & Employee Records

Good employee management depends on reliable records. Managers may remember the broad outline of a workplace issue, but memories become less reliable over time, managers change roles and employees may have a different recollection of what was discussed.

Appropriate documentation allows employers to understand what happened, what the employee was told, what support was provided and why subsequent decisions were made.

Record keeping should nevertheless be proportionate. Employers do not need to document every routine interaction with employees. The objective is to maintain sufficient records of matters that may be relevant to the employment relationship while complying with applicable data protection and confidentiality requirements.

1. What Employee Records Should Employers Keep?

The records required will depend on the organisation and the employee's circumstances, but may include:

• employment contracts and written particulars;
• changes to employment terms;
• job descriptions;
• performance records;
• training and development records;
• absence records;
• return-to-work records;
• flexible working documentation;
• records relating to family leave;
• reasonable adjustment records;
• grievances;
• disciplinary records;
• investigation materials;
• formal warnings;
• consultation records;
• correspondence concerning significant employment decisions; and
• termination documentation.

Different categories of information may require different retention arrangements and levels of access.

2. Recording Significant Management Conversations

Not every conversation between a manager and employee requires a formal note.

However, where a discussion concerns a significant performance, conduct, attendance or workplace issue, creating an appropriate record can be valuable.

A management note might record:

• the date of the discussion;
• who was present;
• the issue discussed;
• specific examples raised;
• the employee's explanation;
• any support requested or offered;
• the expectations established;
• actions agreed;
• relevant timescales; and
• the proposed review arrangements.

The record should reflect what actually happened rather than what the manager later wishes had been said.

3. Confirming Important Matters in Writing

Important management discussions may need to be confirmed in writing.

This can reduce subsequent disagreement about expectations or agreed actions.

Written confirmation may be particularly useful where:

• performance improvement is required;
• attendance has become a concern;
• the employee has been given a management instruction;
• temporary working arrangements have been agreed;
• support or adjustments have been discussed;
• a significant workplace concern has been raised; or
• the consequences of continued problems have been explained.

The level of formality should reflect the situation. A short follow-up email may be sufficient for an ordinary management discussion, while a formal HR process will generally require more structured documentation.

4. Recording the Employee's Explanation

Employee records should not contain only the employer's version of events.

Where an employee provides an explanation relevant to a management decision, that explanation should be considered and, where appropriate, recorded.

For example, an employee accused of poor performance may explain that they received conflicting instructions, lacked access to necessary systems or were experiencing a health problem.

Recording the employee's response helps demonstrate that the organisation considered the issue rather than simply documenting evidence supporting a predetermined conclusion.

The employer does not have to accept every explanation, but should be able to show that relevant representations were considered.

5. Using Professional and Objective Language

Managers should assume that significant written records could later be read by someone outside the immediate management team.

This may include:

• HR;
• senior management;
• the employee;
• legal advisers;
• ACAS;
• a regulator; or
• an Employment Tribunal.

Records should therefore use professional and objective language.

Descriptions such as "lazy", "troublemaker", "always difficult", "not committed" or "we need to get rid of them" can create problems because they express conclusions or frustration rather than identifying the underlying workplace issue.

A stronger record identifies specific facts, behaviours or performance concerns.

For example, rather than recording that an employee is "unreliable", the manager could record the relevant attendance history or the particular deadlines that were missed.

6. Distinguishing Facts, Allegations and Opinions

Employee records should distinguish between matters that have been established and matters that remain disputed.

For example:

Fact: the employee arrived at 10.15am on a particular date.

Allegation: a colleague states that the employee made a particular comment.

Employee's position: the employee denies making the comment.

Management assessment: after considering the available evidence, the decision-maker reaches a conclusion about what probably occurred.

Failing to make these distinctions can result in allegations being repeated in later records as though they had already been established.

7. Maintaining a Clear Chronology

A clear chronology can become particularly important where an employee issue develops over several months.

For example, a performance case may involve:

• initial concerns;
• informal discussions;
• training or support;
• review meetings;
• further performance problems;
• a formal improvement process;
• warnings;
• appeals; and
• an eventual decision.

If records are fragmented across individual managers' inboxes, handwritten notes and messaging platforms, it can become difficult to understand the sequence of events.

HR systems and case files should therefore allow significant employee matters to be reconstructed where necessary.

8. Informal and Formal Records

Employers should distinguish informal management documentation from formal HR records.

An informal management note may record that an issue was discussed and expectations clarified. A formal warning, by contrast, may have defined consequences under a disciplinary or capability procedure.

Managers should avoid creating uncertainty by issuing documents described as informal warnings while treating them as formal sanctions later.

Where a formal procedure is being used, documentation should clearly identify the nature and status of the decision.

9. Documenting Performance Management

Performance decisions should be supported by evidence wherever reasonably possible.

Useful records may include:

• performance objectives;
• targets;
• work outputs;
• quality measures;
• customer feedback;
• management observations;
• training provided;
• feedback discussions;
• performance improvement plans;
• review meetings; and
• the employee's comments on performance concerns.

Employers should avoid creating a detailed evidence trail only after deciding that they want to dismiss an employee.

Contemporaneous performance management is generally more credible and more useful because it reflects what managers were actually doing at the time.

10. Documenting Conduct Issues

Conduct records may include allegations, investigation materials, witness evidence, meeting notes, correspondence and disciplinary outcomes.

Where allegations are disputed, records should make that clear.

Managers should also ensure that evidence relevant to the employee's defence or mitigation is retained rather than maintaining only material supporting the allegation.

Where a disciplinary warning is issued, the documentation should clearly explain the finding, sanction and relevant consequences in accordance with the applicable procedure.

11. Sensitive Employee Information

HR records can contain highly sensitive information.

This may include information concerning:

• health;
• disability;
• pregnancy;
• family circumstances;
• grievances;
• disciplinary allegations;
• sexual harassment complaints;
• criminal allegations;
• trade union matters;
• whistleblowing concerns; or
• other personal circumstances.

Access to this information should be appropriately controlled.

The fact that an individual is a manager does not necessarily mean they require unrestricted access to every aspect of an employee's HR record.

12. Medical Information

Medical and health information requires particular care.

Employers should consider what information they genuinely need for employment purposes and who needs access to it.

A line manager may need to know that particular workplace adjustments are required without necessarily needing access to the employee's complete medical history.

Occupational health reports, medical correspondence and records of health-related discussions should be handled in accordance with applicable data protection requirements.

13. Emails, Messaging Platforms and Informal Communications

Significant employee-management discussions increasingly take place through email, Teams, Slack, WhatsApp or other messaging platforms.

Managers should not assume that informal digital communications fall outside the employment record simply because they were sent quickly or from a mobile device.

Messages concerning employees may later become relevant to:

• internal investigations;
• grievances;
• data access requests;
• legal disclosure;
• regulatory enquiries; or
• Employment Tribunal proceedings.

Managers should therefore communicate professionally when discussing employees across workplace systems and avoid using private messaging channels as a means of creating an unofficial HR record outside normal organisational controls.

14. Data Protection and Employee Privacy

Employee information is subject to data protection requirements.

Employers should have an appropriate basis for collecting and using personal information and should consider principles including:

• lawfulness, fairness and transparency;
• purpose limitation;
• data minimisation;
• accuracy;
• storage limitation;
• security; and
• accountability.

Additional requirements can apply to special category data, including health information.

Employers should therefore avoid collecting information merely because it might conceivably be useful in the future.

HR record keeping should support legitimate employment purposes while respecting employees' information rights.

15. Employee Access to Information

Employers should not assume that internal management records will always remain unseen by the employee concerned.

Depending on the circumstances and applicable law, employees may obtain access to personal information held about them.

Documents may also become relevant during grievances, litigation, regulatory processes or legal disclosure.

This reinforces the importance of accurate, professional and evidence-based record keeping.

Managers should write records on the assumption that their wording may eventually need to be explained.

16. Record Retention

Employee records should not automatically be retained indefinitely.

Employers should establish appropriate retention periods based on the nature of the information, the purpose for which it is held and applicable legal or regulatory requirements.

Different categories of HR records may justify different retention periods.

For example, the appropriate retention period for routine absence information may differ from that applicable to payroll records, contractual documentation, workplace investigation materials or records connected with legal proceedings.

Organisations should therefore adopt a structured retention approach rather than keeping every employee document permanently.

17. Records When Managers Change

Employee-management problems can become particularly difficult when a line manager leaves or responsibility for a team changes.

A new manager may know that an employee has historically been regarded as a poor performer without having any reliable record explaining why.

This can create two risks: legitimate previous management work may be lost, or unsupported opinions about an employee may be inherited as though they were established facts.

Appropriate records allow the new manager to understand what has actually happened and determine what remains relevant.

Managers should not rely solely on informal verbal handovers concerning employee performance or conduct.

18. Preserving Records When a Dispute Develops

Where a significant employment dispute develops or legal proceedings are threatened, employers should consider whether relevant records need to be preserved.

This may include:

• emails;
• messages;
• HR records;
• meeting notes;
• performance information;
• absence records;
• investigation materials;
• CCTV or other relevant evidence; and
• documents held by individual managers.

Routine deletion practices may need to be considered where relevant material is required for an active dispute or legal process.

Specialist advice may be appropriate where there is uncertainty about preservation, disclosure or legal privilege.

19. Reviewing the Record Before Significant Decisions

Before taking a significant employment decision, the decision-maker should consider the relevant employee record rather than relying solely on a manager's summary.

For example, before dismissal the employer may need to review:

• the original concern;
• relevant evidence;
• previous discussions;
• warnings;
• support provided;
• the employee's explanations;
• relevant medical information;
• reasonable adjustments;
• previous review outcomes; and
• any appeal or grievance material relevant to the decision.

This can identify inconsistencies, missing steps or information that needs further consideration before a final decision is made.

20. Records Should Support Management, Not Manufacture a Case

Documentation should reflect genuine employee management.

Problems can arise where managers decide that they want an employee to leave and only then begin creating a retrospective paper trail designed to justify that outcome.

Records should instead be created as issues arise and should fairly reflect both the employer's concerns and relevant employee responses.

A strong employee record is not necessarily one containing large volumes of negative material. It is one that allows an independent reader to understand what happened, how the employer responded and why subsequent decisions were made.

Effective documentation therefore supports good management throughout the employment relationship. It improves continuity, helps managers make informed decisions and provides evidence of the organisation's approach if its actions are later challenged.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section N: The Role of Line Managers

Line managers have a central role in employee management. HR can provide policies, processes, advice and specialist support, but much of the employment relationship is shaped by the employee's everyday interaction with their manager.

Managers set expectations, allocate work, provide feedback, identify problems, respond to concerns and often determine when an issue needs to be escalated. Their actions can therefore have a significant effect on employee performance, workplace relationships and employment law risk.

Effective organisations should ensure that managers understand both their management responsibilities and the point at which HR involvement is required.

1. Setting Clear Expectations

Employees should understand what their manager expects from them.

This can include expectations relating to:

• job responsibilities;
• performance standards;
• quality of work;
• deadlines;
• attendance and punctuality;
• communication;
• workplace behaviour;
• team responsibilities;
• compliance with policies; and
• reporting concerns or problems.

Managers should not assume that expectations are obvious simply because they understand the role themselves.

Clear expectations provide employees with a meaningful opportunity to meet the required standard and give the employer a stronger basis for addressing problems if they arise.

2. Providing Regular Feedback

Employee feedback should not be reserved for annual appraisals or formal performance processes.

Regular feedback allows managers to reinforce effective performance and address emerging problems before they become established.

Useful feedback should generally be:

• specific;
• timely;
• related to identifiable work or behaviour;
• clear about the required standard; and
• constructive about what should happen next.

An employee who is repeatedly told that their performance is satisfactory should not ordinarily discover for the first time during a formal process that their manager has privately considered their performance unacceptable for months.

Managers should raise genuine concerns when they arise rather than allowing them to accumulate.

3. Identifying Problems Early

Line managers are often the first people able to identify changes in employee performance, attendance or behaviour.

Early indicators might include:

• missed deadlines;
• declining work quality;
• increased absence;
• repeated lateness;
• withdrawal from colleagues;
• conflict within the team;
• uncharacteristic behaviour;
• customer complaints;
• failure to follow procedures; or
• difficulty coping with workload.

These indicators do not necessarily establish the cause of the problem.

The manager's role is to identify that something may require attention and explore the position appropriately rather than immediately reaching a conclusion about the employee.

4. Having Difficult Conversations

A significant part of effective line management involves being willing to have difficult conversations.

Managers may need to tell an employee that their performance is below standard, discuss inappropriate behaviour, question repeated absence or address conflict within the team.

Avoiding these conversations rarely resolves the underlying issue.

Instead, delay can result in:

• poor performance becoming established;
• colleague frustration;
• inconsistent standards;
• loss of management credibility;
• more difficult formal procedures later; and
• employees being surprised when concerns are eventually raised.

Managers should be trained to address concerns directly while remaining professional, evidence-based and open to the employee's explanation.

5. Listening to Employees

Effective management is not simply the communication of instructions from manager to employee.

Managers should also listen when employees raise concerns, explain difficulties or challenge aspects of a management decision.

Listening does not mean the manager has to agree with the employee.

It allows the manager to identify information that may affect the appropriate response.

For example, an apparent performance issue may reveal a training problem, an attendance issue may involve disability, or a disagreement about instructions may expose a genuine health and safety concern.

Managers who dismiss employee explanations too quickly can miss issues carrying significant HR or legal implications.

6. Recognising Employment Law Warning Signs

Line managers are not expected to become employment lawyers, but they should be able to recognise circumstances requiring HR support.

Warning signs may include references to:

• discrimination;
• harassment;
• disability;
• reasonable adjustments;
• pregnancy or maternity;
• family-related rights;
• whistleblowing;
• health and safety concerns;
• workplace stress;
• formal grievances;
• trade union activity;
• legal proceedings; or
• resignation because of the employer's alleged conduct.

The manager does not necessarily need to determine the legal status of the issue personally. They need to recognise that further advice may be required before significant action is taken.

7. Knowing When to Escalate to HR

Managers should have clear escalation routes into HR.

HR involvement may be appropriate where:

• informal management has not resolved a problem;
• a formal warning may be required;
• serious misconduct is alleged;
• suspension is being considered;
• a grievance has been raised;
• discrimination or harassment is alleged;
• long-term sickness is involved;
• disability or reasonable adjustments may be relevant;
• organisational change affects employment terms;
• redundancy is being considered;
• dismissal may become an outcome; or
• the manager is uncertain about the appropriate process.

Escalation should occur early enough for HR to influence the process rather than only after a significant decision has already been made.

8. Working Effectively With HR

HR and line managers have different but complementary responsibilities.

The line manager will often have the closest knowledge of the employee's work, team and operational context. HR can provide procedural expertise, organisational consistency and guidance on employment risk.

Effective collaboration may involve the manager providing:

• specific examples of the concern;
• relevant documentation;
• the employee's previous management history;
• information about operational impact;
• details of previous discussions; and
• the manager's proposed objective.

HR can then help determine the appropriate process and identify issues requiring further consideration.

Managers should not simply hand difficult employees to HR and withdraw from the process. The underlying issue frequently remains a management responsibility even where HR is providing support.

9. Creating Reliable Evidence

Line managers are responsible for much of the evidence later used in formal HR procedures.

A performance process may depend on the manager's records of missed targets, feedback and support. An attendance process may rely on previous return-to-work discussions. A conduct investigation may require the manager to explain what they observed.

Managers should therefore maintain appropriate contemporaneous records of significant issues.

Records should identify facts and examples rather than rely on broad descriptions such as "poor attitude" or "not good enough".

Good records make subsequent HR decisions more reliable and reduce dependence on memory.

10. Avoiding Unauthorised Commitments

Managers can inadvertently create problems by making commitments to employees without checking whether they have authority to do so.

This can arise when discussing:

• pay increases;
• bonuses;
• promotions;
• permanent homeworking;
• changes to working hours;
• additional leave;
• changes to duties;
• termination arrangements; or
• other contractual matters.

Managers should understand which decisions they are authorised to make and which require HR or senior approval.

Where an arrangement is temporary or subject to review, this should be made clear rather than allowing the employee reasonably to understand that a permanent commitment has been made.

11. Maintaining Confidentiality

Managers frequently receive sensitive employee information.

This can include information about health, family circumstances, grievances, disciplinary allegations, pay, disability or workplace complaints.

Managers should understand that such information should not be shared casually with colleagues or other managers.

Information should generally be disclosed on an appropriate need-to-know basis.

At the same time, managers should avoid promising absolute confidentiality where information may need to be shared with HR or others to address the issue properly.

12. Adapting Management Without Becoming Inconsistent

Different employees may require different levels or methods of management.

A highly experienced employee may require relatively little supervision. A new employee may need regular guidance. A disabled employee may require a particular communication method as a reasonable adjustment.

Adapting management in this way does not necessarily create inconsistency.

The underlying organisational standards can remain consistent while the method used to support employees in meeting those standards differs according to legitimate circumstances.

Managers should understand the difference between appropriate individualisation and arbitrary preferential treatment.

13. Managing High Performers

Employee management is not limited to dealing with problems.

High-performing employees also require effective management.

Managers should consider:

• development opportunities;
• career progression;
• appropriate challenge;
• recognition;
• workload;
• succession planning;
• retention risk; and
• whether strong performance is being relied upon excessively.

High performance should not result in conduct problems being ignored or an employee being allowed to operate outside ordinary workplace standards.

Equally, employers should avoid overloading strong performers simply because they are capable of absorbing additional work.

14. Managing Remote and Hybrid Employees

Remote and hybrid working can require managers to adapt how they communicate and monitor work.

Managers may need to establish clear arrangements for:

• availability;
• communication;
• meetings;
• work allocation;
• performance measurement;
• team interaction;
• supervision;
• information security; and
• escalating workplace concerns.

Managers should avoid equating physical visibility with performance. Remote employees should generally be assessed by relevant work standards rather than assumptions based on whether the manager can see them working.

At the same time, remote working should not prevent legitimate performance or conduct concerns from being addressed.

15. Managing Managers

Managers themselves need effective management.

An organisation can have comprehensive HR policies but still experience significant employee-relations problems if individual managers apply them poorly.

Senior management and HR should consider whether managers:

• set appropriate expectations;
• provide regular feedback;
• address problems promptly;
• apply policies consistently;
• maintain appropriate records;
• recognise legal risk;
• escalate cases appropriately;
• communicate professionally; and
• manage employees respectfully.

Patterns of grievances, high employee turnover, repeated absence or conflict within one team may indicate a management problem rather than a series of unrelated employee problems.

16. Training Line Managers

Managers should receive practical training appropriate to the responsibilities they hold.

Training may cover:

• performance management;
• conduct and disciplinary issues;
• absence management;
• handling difficult conversations;
• grievances;
• equality and discrimination;
• disability and reasonable adjustments;
• harassment prevention;
• whistleblowing awareness;
• documentation;
• data protection and confidentiality;
• employee wellbeing;
• HR escalation; and
• organisational policies.

Training should focus on practical decision-making rather than simply asking managers to read policies.

Managers need to understand how to recognise a problem, what they can handle themselves and when they should seek support.

17. Supporting Managers Through Difficult Cases

Complex employee cases can place significant pressure on line managers.

A manager may be dealing with an employee who has raised a grievance against them while simultaneously trying to manage that employee's performance. They may be responsible for maintaining team operations during a long-term absence or dealing with allegations involving members of their own team.

HR should provide managers with appropriate support while retaining sufficient objectivity to assess the case.

Where the manager is personally involved in the dispute, it may be necessary for another manager to take responsibility for parts of the process.

The objective should be to protect the integrity of the decision-making process rather than leaving the original manager to handle every element simply because they have line-management responsibility.

18. Holding Managers Accountable

Organisations should not treat people management as an optional part of a manager's role.

Where managers repeatedly fail to address problems, ignore HR procedures, make inappropriate commitments or create employee-relations risks, the organisation should address those management shortcomings.

Management accountability can include:

• clear people-management responsibilities;
• management objectives;
• training requirements;
• HR oversight;
• feedback from senior management;
• review of employee-relations outcomes; and
• appropriate action where management standards are not met.

A manager's operational or commercial performance should not automatically excuse poor people management.

19. A Practical Line Manager Framework

Managers can use a straightforward framework when an employee issue arises:

Identify  What specifically has happened or changed?

Discuss  What does the employee say about the situation?

Understand  Is there an underlying explanation or protected circumstance?

Manage  Can the issue be addressed through ordinary line management?

Document  Does the conversation or decision require an appropriate record?

Escalate  Does HR need to become involved?

Review  Has the issue improved or is further action required?

This approach helps managers intervene early without attempting to resolve complex HR or legal issues beyond their role.

20. Line Management as the First Layer of HR Risk Management

Many serious employee disputes begin as relatively ordinary workplace problems.

A performance concern is not raised clearly. An absence pattern is ignored. A complaint is dismissed too quickly. A manager sends an inappropriate message. A workplace conflict is allowed to continue until relationships have broken down.

Effective line management can prevent many of these situations from escalating.

The manager's role is therefore not simply to supervise work. Managers form the first operational layer of the organisation's employee-management and HR risk framework.

Employers should equip managers to make routine people decisions confidently while ensuring that they know when an issue has moved beyond ordinary management and requires specialist HR or legal support.

 

 

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section O: Employment Law Risks When Managing Employees

Employee management decisions can engage a wide range of employment law rights. A decision that appears operational  changing duties, addressing absence, managing performance or responding to a complaint  can carry additional legal implications depending on the employee's circumstances and the way the decision is implemented.

Managers do not need to become employment law specialists. They do, however, need to recognise when legal risk may be present and when HR or legal advice should be obtained before significant action is taken.

This is particularly important during a period of employment law reform. The Employment Rights Act 2025 is being implemented in stages through 2026 and 2027, meaning employers should check the law in force at the time of a particular decision rather than relying on historic policies or assumptions.

1. Unfair Dismissal

Employees who satisfy the applicable statutory requirements may have the right not to be unfairly dismissed.

At present, an employee will generally require two years' continuous employment to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim, subject to important exceptions where no ordinary qualifying period applies.

From 1 January 2027, the qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal is due to reduce to six months.

This change is particularly important for employers that have historically treated the first two years of employment as a relatively low-risk period for dismissal. Probation periods and short service should not be treated as substitutes for proper management and decision-making.

Where ordinary unfair dismissal protection applies, the employer will generally need to establish a potentially fair reason for dismissal and show that it acted reasonably in treating that reason as sufficient for dismissal in the circumstances.

Potentially fair reasons can include:

• conduct;
• capability or qualifications;
• redundancy;
• illegality or statutory restriction; and
• some other substantial reason.

The existence of a potentially fair reason does not automatically make a dismissal fair. The procedure followed and the reasonableness of the employer's decision can also be relevant.

2. Changes to Unfair Dismissal Compensation

Employers should also be aware of changes to the potential financial exposure associated with unfair dismissal claims.

From 1 January 2027, the statutory cap on the compensatory award for ordinary unfair dismissal is due to be removed.

The precise value of an individual claim will continue to depend on the applicable legal rules, the employee's losses and the circumstances of the case, but removal of the cap increases the potential significance of dismissal risk, particularly for higher-paid employees.

This reinforces the importance of proper management, documentation and procedure before dismissal decisions are made.

3. Automatically Unfair Dismissal

Some dismissals can be automatically unfair because the reason for dismissal is connected with a specifically protected statutory circumstance.

Depending on the circumstances, protections can arise in areas including:

• pregnancy and family-related rights;
• whistleblowing;
• health and safety activities or concerns;
• trade union membership or activities;
• assertion of certain statutory rights; and
• other specifically protected reasons.

The ordinary qualifying service requirement applicable to standard unfair dismissal claims does not apply to a number of automatically unfair dismissal protections.

This means short service does not necessarily make dismissal low risk.

Before dismissing an employee with limited service, employers should therefore consider why the employee is being dismissed and whether any protected reason or activity is involved.

4. Discrimination

Discrimination law can apply throughout the employment relationship and is not dependent on the employee having a particular length of service.

The protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 are:

• age;
• disability;
• gender reassignment;
• marriage and civil partnership;
• pregnancy and maternity;
• race;
• religion or belief;
• sex; and
• sexual orientation.

Discrimination issues can arise in relation to recruitment, pay, promotion, training, allocation of work, performance management, absence management, flexible working, disciplinary action, redundancy and dismissal.

Employers should focus on the reasons for decisions and ensure that management action is not based on unlawful assumptions or treatment connected with protected characteristics.

5. Disability Discrimination and Reasonable Adjustments

Disability can create particular complexity because an employee's condition may affect attendance, performance, communication or their ability to comply with ordinary workplace arrangements.

Employers may need to consider the duty to make reasonable adjustments where the applicable legal requirements are met.

Potential issues can include:

• adjusting working arrangements;
• changing particular duties;
• providing equipment;
• altering workplace practices;
• adjusting management processes;
• considering disability-related absence;
• providing additional support; or
• considering alternative work.

Other forms of disability discrimination can also be relevant, including unfavourable treatment arising from disability and direct or indirect discrimination.

Managers should therefore seek advice where disability may be materially connected with the management concern.

6. Pregnancy and Maternity

Pregnancy and maternity attract specific statutory protections.

Employers should take particular care when managing:

• pregnancy-related sickness;
• performance during pregnancy;
• health and safety issues;
• maternity leave;
• return from maternity leave;
• organisational change;
• redundancy; and
• dismissal.

Pregnancy-related sickness should be identified and managed appropriately rather than simply being treated as ordinary sickness absence in a way that disadvantages the employee because of pregnancy.

Redundancy protection can also apply during pregnancy and protected periods associated with certain forms of family leave, including priority rights in relation to suitable alternative vacancies where the statutory requirements are met.

7. Family-Related Employment Rights

Employees may have statutory rights associated with maternity, paternity, adoption, shared parental arrangements, parental leave, carer's leave, time off for dependants and other family-related circumstances.

Managers should avoid treating the legitimate exercise of these rights as evidence of poor commitment, unreliability or lack of career ambition.

Problems can arise where employees experience disadvantage because they have taken or requested statutory leave or exercised another protected right.

HR advice should be considered where a significant management decision coincides with an employee exercising family-related rights.

8. Whistleblowing

Whistleblowing protections can become relevant where a worker makes a qualifying disclosure meeting the statutory requirements.

Managers should not assume that the employee must use the word "whistleblowing" for legal protection potentially to arise.

A disclosure may concern matters such as:

• criminal offences;
• breaches of legal obligations;
• miscarriages of justice;
• danger to health and safety;
• environmental damage; or
• concealment of relevant wrongdoing.

Employees and workers can have protection against detrimental treatment for protected whistleblowing, while dismissal of an employee for making a protected disclosure can engage automatic unfair dismissal protection.

The fact that an individual has raised a protected concern does not prevent an employer from addressing genuine and unrelated performance or conduct issues. However, the organisation should be able to demonstrate that management action is based on legitimate reasons rather than retaliation for the disclosure.

9. Health and Safety

Employee management can intersect with health and safety obligations.

Issues may arise where employees:

• raise workplace safety concerns;
• report hazards;
• experience work-related injury or illness;
• refuse particular work because of safety concerns;
• require adjustments to work safely; or
• carry out safety-related functions.

Managers should avoid treating a safety concern automatically as insubordination or poor attitude.

The underlying issue should be understood and, where necessary, escalated through the organisation's health and safety arrangements.

Specific employment protections can also apply in relation to certain health and safety activities and circumstances.

10. Contractual Rights

The employment contract remains relevant throughout employee management.

Contractual issues can arise in relation to:

• pay;
• hours;
• duties;
• work location;
• notice;
• benefits;
• bonus arrangements;
• sick pay;
• garden leave;
• confidentiality; and
• post-termination restrictions.

Managers should not assume that the employer can change contractual arrangements simply because there is a business reason for doing so.

Before implementing significant changes, the organisation should understand whether employee agreement is required, whether contractual flexibility exists, what consultation is appropriate and what legal risks could arise.

11. Constructive Dismissal

Constructive dismissal can become relevant where an employee resigns in response to an alleged sufficiently serious breach of contract by the employer.

Potential allegations can arise from a single serious breach or, depending on the circumstances, a series of actions said to have cumulatively undermined the employment relationship.

Issues sometimes associated with constructive dismissal disputes include:

• significant unilateral contractual changes;
• serious failures to address workplace complaints;
• unjustified reduction of status or responsibilities;
• serious unreasonable treatment;
• breaches relating to pay; or
• conduct alleged to have fundamentally damaged mutual trust and confidence.

Constructive dismissal is legally complex and not every workplace disagreement, unreasonable decision or contractual breach will satisfy the relevant legal test.

Where an employee alleges a fundamental breach, threatens to resign because of the employer's conduct or resigns during a serious workplace dispute, legal advice should be considered promptly.

12. Changing Employment Terms and Dismissal and Re-Engagement

Changing contractual terms can be a particularly high-risk area of employee management.

Employers may seek changes because of restructuring, financial pressures, new working practices, changes in location, revised hours or other business requirements.

Where agreement cannot be reached, employers have historically sometimes considered dismissal and an offer of re-engagement on new terms, commonly described as dismissal and re-engagement or "fire and rehire".

This is a specialist area subject to significant procedural and statutory requirements, and the legal framework is changing.

Employers should not assume that dismissal and re-engagement provides a straightforward mechanism for imposing contractual change. Depending on the circumstances, substantial employment law, consultation, compensation and dismissal risks may arise.

Specialist legal advice should be obtained before an employer moves towards dismissal and re-engagement, and the organisation should check the statutory framework in force at the relevant time.

13. Wages and Pay

Employers should exercise care when making deductions from wages or altering pay arrangements.

Potential issues can arise in relation to:

• unauthorised deductions;
• bonus payments;
• commission;
• sick pay;
• holiday pay;
• notice pay;
• overpayments;
• salary reductions; and
• final salary payments.

Managers should not withhold pay as an informal sanction or make deductions simply because they consider them fair.

The contractual and statutory basis for any proposed deduction should be established.

14. Working Time and Rest

Working arrangements should take account of applicable requirements concerning working time, rest and paid annual leave.

Managers should be particularly alert where employees are routinely working excessive hours, missing rest periods or failing to take annual leave because of workload.

Problems can also arise where employees work additional hours remotely or outside normal workplace systems without those working patterns being visible to management.

Workforce planning should therefore consider not only whether work is completed but whether working arrangements remain compliant and sustainable.

15. Data Protection and Privacy

Employee management generates substantial amounts of personal information.

This can include:

• performance records;
• absence information;
• medical information;
• investigation materials;
• grievances;
• disciplinary records;
• emails and messages;
• monitoring data; and
• other HR information.

Employers should ensure that employee information is collected and used for legitimate purposes, accessed appropriately, retained for suitable periods and protected against unauthorised disclosure.

Particular care is required with special category data, including health information.

Monitoring employees can also raise privacy and data protection issues. Employers should therefore consider the necessity, proportionality and transparency of monitoring arrangements rather than assuming that ownership of workplace systems permits unrestricted surveillance.

16. Confidentiality

Employees may have contractual or common law obligations concerning confidential business information.

Employers also hold confidential information about employees.

Managers should therefore understand both sides of workplace confidentiality.

Potential issues include:

• disclosure of commercial information;
• customer data;
• employee medical information;
• grievance allegations;
• disciplinary matters;
• salary information;
• investigation evidence; and
• business strategy.

Confidentiality should not be used improperly to prevent employees from exercising statutory rights, making protected disclosures or reporting unlawful conduct.

17. Harassment and the Employer's Preventative Responsibilities

Employers should not approach workplace harassment solely as an issue to be investigated after a complaint has been received.

Employers are subject to a statutory duty to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment of employees in the course of their employment, and the wider legislative framework continues to develop.

Preventative measures may include:

• appropriate policies;
• manager and employee training;
• effective reporting routes;
• identifying workplace risk factors;
• responding to known behaviour;
• monitoring complaints and patterns; and
• reviewing whether preventative measures remain effective.

Employers should ensure their harassment-prevention arrangements reflect the legal requirements in force at the relevant time.

18. Vicarious Liability

Employers can potentially be legally responsible for discriminatory or harassing acts carried out by employees in the course of employment.

This means inappropriate workplace behaviour can create liability not only for the individual involved but also for the organisation.

Employers should therefore take reasonable preventative measures rather than relying on the argument that a particular employee acted without senior management approval.

Effective measures can include appropriate policies, credible training, reporting arrangements, management intervention and action where inappropriate conduct becomes known.

Whether an employer is liable in a particular case will depend on the applicable legal tests and facts.

19. Victimisation and Retaliation

Employees who raise certain protected complaints should not subsequently be subjected to unlawful detrimental treatment because they did so.

Victimisation under equality law can arise in connection with specified protected acts, while separate protections can apply to whistleblowing and other statutory activities.

Risk can arise where an employee makes a complaint and managers subsequently:

• exclude them from opportunities;
• alter their duties adversely;
• begin unsupported performance action;
• treat them differently from colleagues;
• make hostile comments about the complaint; or
• dismiss them because they raised the issue.

Legitimate management can continue, but the employer should ensure it has objective evidence for subsequent decisions and can distinguish those decisions from the employee's protected complaint or activity.

20. Trade Union Rights

Trade union issues can carry specific statutory protections.

Managers should seek HR advice where employment decisions may be connected with:

• trade union membership;
• trade union activities;
• representation;
• collective consultation;
• industrial action; or
• other protected union-related matters.

Managers should not treat legitimate union involvement as disloyalty or automatically allow it to influence performance, disciplinary or dismissal decisions.

21. Employment Status

Not everyone working for an organisation necessarily has the same employment status or statutory rights.

Depending on the circumstances, an individual may be an employee, worker, self-employed contractor or fall within another relevant legal category.

The label used in a contract is not necessarily conclusive.

The reality of the working relationship can be important when determining legal status and applicable rights.

Organisations should therefore take care where individuals described as contractors or consultants are managed in a manner that may be inconsistent with the intended relationship.

22. Immigration and Right to Work

Employers have separate legal responsibilities relating to the prevention of illegal working and right to work checks.

Employee management can raise immigration issues where, for example, an employee's permission to work is time-limited, their immigration status changes or the employer becomes aware of a potential right to work problem.

Employers should avoid making assumptions based on nationality, ethnicity or accent and should apply compliant right to work processes consistently.

Where a right to work concern arises, the employer should establish the legal position before taking dismissal action. These issues can involve both immigration compliance and employment law risk and should be managed through the organisation's dedicated right to work and workforce compliance procedures.

23. Redundancy and Organisational Change

Redundancy and restructuring can engage specific consultation, selection and dismissal requirements.

Additional obligations can arise where collective redundancy thresholds are met.

Employers should also consider:

• the genuine reason for the proposed change;
• the appropriate pool for selection;
• selection criteria;
• consultation;
• alternative employment;
• discrimination risks;
• pregnancy and family-leave redundancy protection;
• notice;
• redundancy payments; and
• the fairness of any eventual dismissal.

Redundancy should not be used as a label for dismissing an employee where the genuine reason relates to performance, conduct or another individual concern.

24. Dismissal Risk Checklist

Before dismissing an employee, employers should consider questions such as:

• What is the genuine reason for dismissal?
• Is that reason supported by evidence?
• What statutory protections apply?
• Does the employee currently have ordinary unfair dismissal protection?
• Could an automatically unfair reason be alleged?
• Could discrimination be relevant?
• Has disability been considered?
• Are pregnancy or family-related rights involved?
• Has the employee raised whistleblowing, health and safety or other protected concerns?
• Has the appropriate procedure been followed?
• Has the employee had an opportunity to respond?
• Have alternatives to dismissal been considered where relevant?
• Is the outcome consistent and proportionate?
• Are contractual notice requirements understood?
• Has the relevant documentation been reviewed?
• Has the law changed since the organisation's policy was last updated?

A short-service employee should not automatically bypass this review because several dismissal-related protections do not depend on the ordinary unfair dismissal qualifying period.

25. High-Risk Employee Decisions

Some employee-management decisions should generally trigger a higher level of review.

Examples include:

• dismissal;
• dismissal and re-engagement;
• redundancy;
• significant contractual changes;
• long-term medical capability decisions;
• action involving a disabled employee;
• action involving pregnancy or maternity;
• serious discrimination or harassment complaints;
• whistleblowing cases;
• suspension of senior employees;
• complex workplace investigations;
• settlement discussions; and
• cases where legal proceedings have been threatened.

The commercial significance of these decisions can justify obtaining specialist advice before the organisation becomes committed to a particular course of action.

26. Employment Law Awareness as Part of Good Management

Employment law should not prevent employers from managing their workforce.

Employers can set standards, address poor performance, investigate misconduct, manage attendance, reorganise work and, where appropriate, dismiss employees.

The legal framework affects how these decisions should be approached and what factors need to be considered.

Good employee management therefore combines legitimate business decision-making with legal awareness. Managers should identify the workplace objective, understand the relevant facts, consider protected circumstances, follow an appropriate process and obtain specialist advice where the risk or complexity justifies it.

As employment law reforms continue to take effect through 2026 and 2027, employers should also keep policies, procedures and manager guidance under review rather than assuming that historic qualifying periods, dismissal rules or HR processes remain current.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section P: Managing Employees Through Organisational Change

Organisations change continuously. Businesses restructure, adopt new technology, relocate operations, revise working practices, reduce costs, acquire other organisations and redesign roles in response to commercial requirements.

These changes frequently affect employees.

Managing employees through organisational change requires more than communicating a final business decision. Employers need to understand how the proposed change affects roles, contractual arrangements, reporting structures and potentially the continued requirement for particular work.

The appropriate process will depend on the nature and scale of the change. Some changes can be implemented through ordinary management arrangements. Others may require employee agreement, consultation, redundancy procedures or more complex workforce planning.

1. Identifying the Employment Impact of Business Change

Before communicating significant organisational change, employers should understand what the proposed business decision means for employees.

The organisation should consider whether the change affects:

• job roles;
• responsibilities;
• reporting lines;
• team structures;
• working hours;
• workplace location;
• pay or benefits;
• working methods;
• technology;
• staffing levels;
• required skills; or
• the continued requirement for particular roles.

This initial assessment helps determine what employee-management process may be required.

A business restructuring does not automatically mean redundancy. Equally, describing a proposal as a "reorganisation" does not prevent redundancy issues arising where the requirement for particular roles or work is reducing or changing materially.

2. Communicating Organisational Change

Poor communication can create uncertainty and resistance even where the underlying business change is legitimate.

Employees will generally want to understand:

What is changing?

Why is the organisation making the change?

How could it affect my role?

When will the change happen?

Has the final decision already been made?

Will employees be consulted?

What happens next?

Employers should distinguish between decisions that have genuinely been made and proposals that remain subject to consultation.

If employees are told that consultation will take place while management communications indicate that every relevant decision has already been finalised, confidence in the process can quickly deteriorate.

3. Consultation

Consultation can be an important part of organisational change.

The nature of consultation will depend on what the employer is proposing and any applicable legal requirements.

Meaningful consultation generally involves more than announcing a decision and allowing employees to comment afterwards.

Where proposals remain open for consideration, employees should have an appropriate opportunity to understand them, raise concerns and suggest alternatives.

The employer does not necessarily have to agree with every employee proposal.

It should, however, consider relevant representations before reaching decisions where consultation is required or has been offered as part of the change process.

4. Changing Employee Roles

Organisational change frequently alters what employees are expected to do.

Minor adjustments to responsibilities may fall within ordinary management arrangements, particularly where the role naturally develops over time.

More substantial changes require greater care.

Employers should consider:

• the employee's existing contractual role;
• the scale of the proposed change;
• whether the new duties are reasonably connected with the existing position;
• whether additional skills or training are required;
• whether pay or status is affected;
• whether the employee agrees to the change; and
• whether the organisation has an appropriate contractual basis for implementing it.

A significant redesign of a role should not automatically be treated as an ordinary management instruction.

5. Changes to Working Hours

Employers may want to change working hours because of customer demand, operational requirements, new shift patterns or changes in how services are delivered.

The employer should understand the contractual position before imposing substantial changes.

Employees may also have personal circumstances that make changes particularly difficult, including childcare, caring responsibilities, health conditions or disability.

This does not necessarily mean the proposed change cannot proceed.

It does mean the organisation should understand both the contractual and individual implications before determining its approach.

6. Changes to Workplace Location

Relocation can range from moving employees within the same building to transferring operations to a different part of the country.

The impact on employees will vary accordingly.

Employers should consider the employment contract, any mobility provisions, travel implications and the practical effect of the proposed move.

A contractual mobility provision should not simply be regarded as an unrestricted right to require an employee to work anywhere.

The circumstances and manner in which any contractual flexibility is exercised remain important.

7. Remote and Hybrid Working Changes

Organisations may also change remote or hybrid working arrangements.

An employer may want employees to attend the workplace more frequently, reduce office attendance or introduce a different hybrid model.

Before changing existing arrangements, employers should establish their status.

Some working patterns may have been expressly agreed as contractual changes. Others may have been introduced temporarily or operated under non-contractual policies.

The organisation should also consider whether particular employees have individual arrangements connected with disability, flexible working or other circumstances.

A general organisational policy change may therefore require individual consideration in some cases.

8. Introducing New Technology

Technology can materially change employee roles.

Automation, artificial intelligence, new software and redesigned systems may remove some tasks, create new responsibilities or change the skills employees require.

Employers should consider the people implications alongside the technology implementation.

This may involve:

• employee consultation;
• training;
• revised responsibilities;
• changes to performance measures;
• workforce reskilling;
• redeployment; or
• potential redundancy.

Employers should avoid assuming that employees who struggle with a new system are automatically incapable of performing their role.

The organisation should consider whether appropriate training and a reasonable opportunity to adapt have been provided.

9. Restructuring Teams and Reporting Lines

Changes to team structures and reporting relationships are common during organisational change.

An employer may merge departments, create new management layers, remove management positions or redistribute responsibilities.

Some changes to reporting arrangements may be relatively straightforward.

Others can substantially affect an employee's status, responsibilities or role.

Managers should consider the substance of the change rather than focusing solely on whether the employee's job title or salary remains the same.

An employee whose responsibilities are significantly reduced may perceive the change very differently from an organisation that considers their formal terms largely unchanged.

10. Redundancy

Organisational change may result in redundancy where the employer's requirements for employees to carry out particular work have ceased or diminished, or where other statutory redundancy circumstances arise.

Where redundancy is potentially involved, employers should move beyond ordinary employee management and follow an appropriate redundancy process.

Depending on the circumstances, this may involve:

• identifying the business rationale;
• determining which roles are affected;
• identifying appropriate selection pools;
• developing selection criteria;
• consulting affected employees;
• considering alternatives;
• identifying suitable alternative employment; and
• determining redundancy outcomes.

Where larger numbers of employees are affected, additional collective consultation obligations may arise.

Redundancy should not be used as a label for removing an employee where the real issue is performance, conduct or a difficult workplace relationship.

The underlying reason for the proposed dismissal matters.

11. Pregnancy, Family Leave & Redundancy Protection

Employers must take particular care where redundancy affects an employee who is pregnant or within a protected period connected with certain forms of family leave.

Where the statutory protection applies and a suitable alternative vacancy exists, the employee may have priority entitlement to be offered that vacancy rather than simply being placed into ordinary competitive selection for it.

Depending on the relevant leave and circumstances, the protected period can extend beyond the period of leave itself and may continue for up to 18 months from the relevant birth, placement or other statutory reference point.

Employers should therefore identify protected employees early in the redundancy process rather than waiting until selection decisions have already been made.

The protection affects the employer's approach to suitable alternative employment and should not be treated merely as a general equality consideration.

Where there is uncertainty about whether an employee falls within the statutory protected period, specialist advice should be obtained before final decisions are made.

12. Selection During Restructuring

Where a restructuring requires fewer employees to perform particular work, the employer may need a method of determining which employees remain.

Selection decisions should be based on appropriate criteria relevant to the organisation's future requirements.

Employers should be cautious about criteria that are highly subjective or that may disadvantage particular employees for reasons unrelated to legitimate business requirements.

Attendance criteria, for example, may require careful consideration where absences relate to disability, pregnancy or other protected circumstances.

Selection documentation should allow the organisation to explain how decisions were reached.

13. Suitable Alternative Employment

Where roles are disappearing or changing significantly, employers should consider whether affected employees can be retained elsewhere within the organisation.

Potential alternatives may include existing vacancies, newly created roles or other suitable positions arising from the restructuring.

The suitability of an alternative role will depend on factors such as:

• duties;
• pay;
• status;
• location;
• working hours;
• skills;
• experience; and
• the employee's individual circumstances.

Employers should distinguish ordinary consideration of suitable alternative employment from the priority rights that can apply to employees protected by the pregnancy and family-leave redundancy regime.

Where an employee accepts suitable alternative employment, a statutory trial period may apply. The ordinary statutory trial period is generally four weeks, although particular circumstances can affect how alternative arrangements operate.

Employers should make the terms of any alternative role clear and document how the proposed position differs from the employee's previous role.

14. Changing Terms and Conditions

Some organisational changes require changes to contractual terms.

Employers may seek to alter:

• pay structures;
• benefits;
• hours;
• location;
• duties;
• working patterns; or
• other contractual arrangements.

Agreement will often be the most straightforward route to implementing contractual change.

Where employees do not agree, the position can become significantly more complex.

Employers should understand the contractual basis for the proposed change, the business reason for it, the consultation undertaken and the potential consequences of attempting to impose the change.

Managers should not assume that a commercial need automatically creates a contractual right to implement the change.

15. Dismissal and Re-Engagement

In some circumstances, employers have historically considered terminating existing contracts and offering continued employment on revised terms where agreement to contractual change cannot be reached.

This approach, commonly referred to as dismissal and re-engagement or "fire and rehire", is a high-risk specialist area.

The legal framework governing dismissal and re-engagement is changing, including through reforms being implemented under the Employment Rights Act 2025.

Employers should not treat dismissal and re-engagement as a routine management mechanism for imposing new terms.

Depending on the circumstances, the employer may face significant risks relating to:

• unfair dismissal;
• consultation;
• collective obligations;
• contractual rights;
• employee relations;
• discrimination;
• compensation; and
• reputational impact.

Specialist legal advice should be taken before an employer moves towards dismissal and re-engagement, and the organisation should verify the statutory framework in force at the relevant time.

16. Transfers, Mergers and Acquisitions

Organisational change can also arise because a business, service or part of an undertaking is being transferred.

Employment protections may apply to affected employees depending on the nature of the transaction.

Employers involved in acquisitions, disposals, outsourcing or insourcing should therefore identify employment implications at an early stage.

Issues can include:

• which employees are affected;
• transfer of employment;
• employee information;
• consultation;
• existing terms and conditions;
• proposed organisational measures; and
• post-transfer integration.

These matters may require specialist advice and should be incorporated into transaction planning rather than addressed only after commercial arrangements have been finalised.

17. Supporting Employees During Change

Even where organisational change does not result in redundancy, employees may experience significant uncertainty.

Managers should recognise the impact change can have on morale, engagement and performance.

Employees may be concerned about:

• job security;
• future responsibilities;
• management changes;
• new technology;
• workload;
• relocation;
• changes to working arrangements; or
• whether further restructuring will follow.

Good change management involves giving employees reliable information when available and avoiding speculation where decisions have not yet been made.

Managers should also be equipped to answer questions or know where employees should be directed for authoritative information.

18. Managing Performance During Organisational Change

Performance can decline during periods of significant change.

Employees may be learning new systems, taking on unfamiliar responsibilities or working within teams that are being reorganised.

Employers can continue to manage performance during organisational change, but the context should be considered.

A reduction in output immediately following a major systems implementation may require a different response from longstanding underperformance unrelated to the change.

Managers should ensure expectations remain realistic and that employees receive appropriate training and support for new responsibilities.

19. Employees Who Resist Change

Not every objection to organisational change is misconduct.

Employees may legitimately question proposals, raise contractual concerns, participate in consultation or explain how changes affect their personal circumstances.

Managers should distinguish between employees expressing disagreement and employees refusing reasonable management instructions after the organisation has properly determined what is required.

The employer should understand the reason for resistance before deciding how to respond.

An employee's objection may identify an issue that the organisation has not previously considered.

Where a legitimate management decision has been made and an employee subsequently refuses to comply without adequate justification, further management action may eventually be required.

20. Equality Considerations During Change

Organisational changes can affect groups of employees differently.

Changes to working hours, location, selection criteria or working arrangements may create particular difficulties for employees with disabilities, caring responsibilities, religious requirements or other protected circumstances.

Employers should consider whether apparently neutral proposals create particular disadvantages and whether the approach can be objectively justified where required or modified appropriately.

Individual circumstances may also require reasonable adjustments.

Equality considerations should therefore form part of change planning rather than being considered only if an employee later complains.

21. Maintaining Business Operations During Change

Organisational change has to be managed while the business continues operating.

Employees may still require objectives, supervision and performance management while consultation or restructuring is underway.

Managers should remain clear about what arrangements continue to apply during the transition.

Uncertainty about future roles does not necessarily remove current responsibilities, but expectations may need to reflect the practical disruption caused by the change programme.

Clear interim management arrangements can help prevent performance and accountability from becoming unclear.

22. Managing the Organisation After the Change

The employee-management process does not end when a restructuring is implemented.

Employees remaining in the organisation may have new roles, managers, colleagues or responsibilities.

The employer should consider whether employees require:

• revised objectives;
• updated job descriptions;
• training;
• new reporting arrangements;
• confirmation of contractual changes;
• integration support; or
• additional management communication.

There may also be a significant effect on employees who remain after redundancies.

Workloads may change and employees may be concerned about further job losses.

Post-change management is therefore important to ensure the intended organisational benefits are actually achieved.

23. Planning Organisational Change Before Announcing It

Employers can create unnecessary risk by announcing organisational changes before understanding how they will be implemented.

Before significant workforce changes are communicated, the organisation should consider:

What is the commercial objective?

Which employees or roles are affected?

Does the proposal involve contractual change?

Could redundancy arise?

Is consultation required?

Are collective obligations potentially relevant?

Are any employees within a protected pregnancy or family-leave redundancy period?

Are there employees requiring particular equality or disability consideration?

What alternatives are available?

Who will manage the process?

What should be communicated and when?

Early HR involvement can help align the commercial objective with the employment process.

Organisational change is ultimately a business decision, but its implementation is also an employee-management exercise. Employers that identify the workforce implications early, communicate clearly and use the appropriate consultation and HR processes are better placed to implement change while maintaining operational continuity and managing employment risk.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section Q: Managing Employee Exits

Every employment relationship eventually ends. An employee may resign, retire, be made redundant, reach the end of a fixed-term arrangement, leave under an agreed settlement or be dismissed following a formal process.

Managing the exit properly matters.

A poorly handled departure can create legal disputes, damage workplace relationships, disrupt operations and expose the organisation's confidential information, systems or client relationships. A well-managed exit provides clarity about why employment is ending, what needs to happen before the employee leaves and how responsibilities will transfer.

The process should reflect the reason for termination rather than treating every departure as the same administrative exercise.

1. Employee Resignations

Employees may decide to resign for many reasons.

Where an employee gives clear notice of resignation, the employer should normally confirm the practical arrangements surrounding the termination.

This may include:

• the employee's final working day;
• the applicable notice period;
• work expected during notice;
• outstanding holiday;
• handover arrangements;
• return of company property;
• continuing confidentiality obligations; and
• arrangements for final pay.

Employers should ensure they understand exactly what the employee has communicated.

A statement made during an argument or an emotional workplace conversation should not necessarily be treated immediately as an unequivocal resignation without considering the circumstances.

Where there is genuine uncertainty about the employee's intention, clarification may be appropriate.

2. Notice Periods

The employment contract should normally establish the notice arrangements applying when either party terminates employment.

Where an employee works their notice, they generally remain employed and subject to their normal contractual responsibilities.

The employer may need to determine what work the employee should perform during this period.

In some cases, normal duties will continue. In others, the organisation may want to change responsibilities, restrict access to sensitive information or implement another contractual arrangement.

Managers should not assume that an employee who has resigned can simply be excluded from work without considering the contractual position.

3. Payment in Lieu of Notice

There may be circumstances where an employer does not want the employee to work their notice period.

Depending on the contractual arrangements and circumstances, the employer may consider making a payment in lieu of notice.

This can allow employment to end without the employee continuing to attend work during the notice period.

The contractual basis and financial implications should be checked before this approach is used.

Employers should distinguish payment in lieu of notice from garden leave, since the employment relationship operates differently under each arrangement.

4. Garden Leave

Garden leave may be useful where an employee is leaving but the employer does not want them actively working during their notice period.

The employee generally remains employed during garden leave and continues to be subject to applicable contractual obligations.

This can be particularly relevant where an employee has access to commercially sensitive information, important clients or strategic business plans.

Employers should check whether the contractual arrangements support the proposed approach.

Garden leave should also be considered alongside any post-termination restrictions where the organisation is seeking to protect its commercial position following the employee's departure.

5. Dismissal

Dismissal may arise for different reasons, including conduct, capability, redundancy, statutory restriction or another potentially fair reason.

The appropriate process depends on the reason for termination.

Employers should avoid beginning with the desired outcome of dismissal and then attempting to identify a procedure that can justify it.

Before terminating employment, the organisation should be clear about:

Why is the employee being dismissed?

What evidence supports that reason?

What process has been followed?

What has the employee said in response?

Were relevant alternatives considered?

Are any statutory or contractual protections relevant?

Who has authority to make the decision?

What notice or termination payment applies?

Is there a right of appeal?

The more significant the decision, the more important it becomes that the employer can answer these questions clearly.

6. Current and Upcoming Unfair Dismissal Rules

At the time of publication, ordinary unfair dismissal protection generally requires two years' continuous employment, subject to important exceptions where no ordinary qualifying period applies.

From 1 January 2027, the qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal is due to reduce to six months.

From the same date, the statutory cap on the compensatory award for ordinary unfair dismissal is also due to be removed.

These changes materially increase the importance of effective management before dismissal, particularly for employees with relatively short service.

Employers should therefore avoid assuming that dismissal risk remains limited simply because an employee has not reached two years' service.

Short-service employees may also have separate protections relating to discrimination, whistleblowing, health and safety, pregnancy, family-related rights and other automatically unfair reasons.

7. Conduct Dismissals

Serious or repeated misconduct may ultimately result in dismissal.

The employer should establish the relevant facts and follow an appropriate disciplinary process before reaching the decision.

Where previous warnings are relied upon, the organisation should understand their status and relevance.

In cases of alleged gross misconduct, dismissal without notice may potentially be considered where the circumstances justify it.

However, describing conduct as "gross misconduct" does not remove the need for an appropriate investigation and decision-making process.

The employer should determine whether the conduct occurred, how serious it was and whether dismissal is an appropriate outcome in the circumstances.

8. Capability and Performance Dismissals

Persistent inability to meet required performance standards can potentially result in dismissal.

Before reaching that stage, the employer will usually need to demonstrate that the performance concern has been identified and that the employee has been given an appropriate opportunity to improve.

Relevant considerations may include:

• the required performance standard;
• evidence of the shortfall;
• previous feedback;
• training and support;
• improvement periods;
• warnings;
• the employee's explanation;
• health or disability considerations; and
• whether sufficient improvement has occurred.

Where the capability issue results from ill health rather than performance, different considerations may apply, including medical evidence, reasonable adjustments and the prospects of returning to or remaining in work.

9. Redundancy Dismissals

Redundancy is different from dismissing an employee because of their individual performance or conduct.

The starting point is a change in the employer's requirements for work, roles or workplace arrangements rather than an allegation that the employee has done something wrong.

Employers should identify the underlying business situation and follow an appropriate redundancy process.

Where selection between employees is required, the organisation should use an appropriate approach and consult affected employees.

Potential alternative employment should also be considered where relevant.

Employers should avoid using redundancy terminology where the real reason for wanting an employee to leave relates to performance, conduct or a damaged management relationship.

10. Protected Redundancy Situations

Additional protection can apply where redundancy affects employees during pregnancy or protected periods connected with certain forms of family leave.

Where the statutory protection applies and a suitable alternative vacancy exists, the employee may have priority entitlement to be offered that vacancy.

This can extend beyond the period of leave itself and may continue for up to 18 months from the relevant statutory reference point, depending on the circumstances.

Employers should identify protected employees before final redundancy decisions are made and should obtain advice where there is uncertainty about how the priority rules apply.

11. Ending Employment During Probation

Employers sometimes assume that an employee can be dismissed during probation without meaningful employment law considerations.

Probation can provide a structured period for assessing suitability, but it does not remove contractual obligations or all statutory employment protections.

Before ending employment during probation, the employer should identify the reason for termination and consider whether there are circumstances carrying additional legal risk.

Particular care may be required where the employee has raised concerns about discrimination, whistleblowing, health and safety, pregnancy, disability or another protected matter.

The employer should also comply with applicable contractual notice arrangements.

The forthcoming reduction in the ordinary unfair dismissal qualifying period to six months from 1 January 2027 will also increase the importance of active probation management.

12. Fixed-Term Employment Ending

Where an employee is engaged for a fixed term, the employer should understand what is intended to happen when that term approaches its end.

The organisation may want to extend the arrangement, offer permanent employment or allow the employment to terminate.

Employers should not assume that the expiry of the stated term has no employment law implications.

The reason the employment is ending and the employee's statutory rights may still require consideration.

Managers should therefore review fixed-term arrangements before the expiry date rather than allowing them to reach the end without any management decision.

13. Agreed Exits

There may be circumstances where the employer and employee agree that the employment relationship should end.

An agreed exit can arise where the parties want certainty, where a workplace dispute has become difficult to resolve or where the organisation wishes to negotiate a termination rather than continue with an uncertain process.

Settlement discussions and settlement agreements can involve significant legal considerations.

Managers should not make informal promises about termination payments or legal claims without appropriate authority.

Where an agreed termination is being considered, HR or legal advice can help structure discussions and ensure that any proposed agreement is dealt with appropriately.

14. Settlement Agreements

A settlement agreement may be used to document agreed terms on which employment ends and to settle specified employment claims.

The terms may deal with matters such as:

• termination date;
• notice;
• termination payments;
• holiday;
• bonuses or commission;
• company property;
• confidentiality;
• post-termination obligations;
• announcements;
• references; and
• claims being settled.

The statutory requirements governing settlement agreements should be observed.

Employers should also consider the commercial objective of the agreement rather than viewing settlement simply as a mechanism for paying an employee to leave.

15. Without Prejudice Discussions

Employers sometimes describe proposed exit discussions as "without prejudice".

The common law without prejudice rule generally applies where there is an existing dispute and the communication forms part of a genuine attempt to settle that dispute.

Simply labelling a conversation or document "without prejudice" does not automatically make it protected from later disclosure.

Whether the rule applies will depend on the circumstances.

Managers should therefore avoid assuming that using the phrase "without prejudice" allows them to say anything they wish without risk of the discussion later becoming relevant.

16. Statutory Protected Conversations

Separate statutory provisions can protect certain pre-termination negotiations in defined circumstances.

These are sometimes referred to as protected conversations.

The statutory protection has its own scope and limitations and should not be treated as identical to the common law without prejudice rule.

Depending on the circumstances, the protection may not apply to every type of employment claim or every form of conduct during the discussion.

Improper behaviour can also affect the extent to which a conversation is protected.

Employers considering a negotiated exit should therefore obtain advice before initiating sensitive discussions where confidentiality of the conversation is important.

17. Exits Involving Protected Circumstances

Particular care is required where an employee who may leave the organisation has recently:

• raised a grievance;
• alleged discrimination;
• made a whistleblowing disclosure;
• raised health and safety concerns;
• announced a pregnancy;
• taken or requested family-related leave;
• disclosed a disability;
• requested reasonable adjustments;
• challenged contractual changes; or
• exercised another statutory employment right.

These circumstances do not necessarily prevent termination.

They can, however, materially affect the risk associated with the decision and the process required.

The employer should be able to establish the genuine reason for the proposed termination and demonstrate that protected activity or circumstances did not improperly influence the outcome.

18. Managing the Notice Period

Once employment is ending, managers should decide how the notice period will operate.

Relevant considerations may include:

• ongoing duties;
• handover responsibilities;
• contact with customers;
• access to confidential information;
• systems access;
• recruitment of a replacement;
• communication with colleagues;
• use of annual leave; and
• whether garden leave or payment in lieu is being used.

Employees should generally remain clear about what is expected until employment actually terminates.

An employee serving notice should not automatically be treated as though they have already left the organisation.

19. Handover Arrangements

A structured handover can protect business continuity.

The departing employee may hold knowledge about clients, systems, projects or internal processes that needs to be transferred.

Depending on the role, a handover may cover:

• current work;
• outstanding deadlines;
• client or customer matters;
• supplier relationships;
• key documents;
• project status;
• recurring responsibilities;
• approved access arrangements; and
• matters requiring immediate attention after departure.

Managers should begin handover planning sufficiently early rather than relying on the employee's final day.

20. Protecting Confidential Information

Employees may have access to commercially sensitive information during their employment.

This can include:

• customer information;
• pricing;
• business plans;
• financial information;
• intellectual property;
• employee data;
• supplier information; or
• strategic plans.

The employer should understand what continuing contractual obligations apply after termination.

Where there is a specific concern about confidential information, the organisation may also need to review access arrangements before the employee leaves.

The response should be proportionate to the risk rather than automatically assuming every departing employee intends to misuse information.

21. Restrictive Covenants

Some employment contracts contain post-termination restrictions intended to protect legitimate business interests.

These may concern activities such as:

• competition;
• solicitation of customers;
• dealing with customers;
• poaching employees; or
• other defined competitive activities.

Whether a particular restriction can be relied upon will depend on its wording and circumstances.

Employers should not assume that every restrictive covenant in a contract will automatically be enforceable.

Where the employee's departure creates a significant competitive risk, specialist advice may be appropriate before the organisation decides what action to take.

22. Company Property and Systems Access

Employers should have a clear process for recovering company property.

Depending on the employee's role, this may include:

• laptops;
• mobile phones;
• access cards;
• keys;
• documents;
• equipment;
• payment cards;
• vehicles; or
• other business property.

IT access should also be managed appropriately.

The organisation may need to close or transfer accounts, preserve business information and redirect communications.

The timing of these steps should reflect the circumstances of the departure. An employee continuing to work during notice may still require normal system access, while immediate restrictions may be appropriate in other situations.

23. Final Pay and Holiday

The employer should ensure the employee's final pay is calculated appropriately.

Depending on the circumstances, this may involve:

• salary to the termination date;
• notice pay;
• outstanding holiday entitlement;
• lawful deductions;
• bonuses;
• commission;
• expenses;
• redundancy payments; or
• other contractual sums.

Disputes about final payments can unnecessarily damage an otherwise orderly exit.

HR and payroll should therefore have accurate information about the termination arrangements before final payroll is processed.

24. References

Employees may ask whether the organisation will provide a reference.

Employers should have a consistent approach to references and ensure managers understand who is authorised to provide them.

Some organisations provide only basic factual references, while others provide more detailed information.

Where a reference is provided, care should be taken to ensure that the information supplied is appropriate and accurate.

Managers should not provide unofficial personal references on company behalf without understanding the organisation's policy.

25. Exit Interviews

Exit interviews can provide useful information about why employees leave and how they experienced the organisation.

They may identify issues involving:

• management;
• workload;
• pay;
• career development;
• team relationships;
• culture;
• working arrangements; or
• organisational processes.

Not every departing employee will provide objective feedback, and a single exit interview should not automatically determine management action.

Patterns across multiple departures can nevertheless provide valuable workforce information.

Employers should consider how exit feedback is reviewed and whether recurring concerns require investigation or organisational action.

26. Communicating the Departure

The organisation should decide how the employee's departure will be communicated internally and, where relevant, externally.

The communication should be appropriate to the circumstances and respect confidentiality.

In most cases, colleagues do not need detailed information about the reasons why another employee is leaving.

Where responsibilities are transferring, employees and relevant clients may need practical information about who will take over the work.

Agreed wording may also form part of a negotiated exit.

27. Managing the Remaining Team

An employee departure can affect those who remain.

Colleagues may inherit additional responsibilities, lose an experienced team member or become concerned about why the employee left.

This can be particularly significant following redundancy, senior departures or contentious dismissals.

Managers should consider:

• redistribution of work;
• interim responsibilities;
• recruitment;
• workload;
• morale;
• communication; and
• any continuing workplace issues connected with the departure.

The objective should be to restore normal operations without disclosing confidential information about the former employee.

28. Learning From Employee Exits

Departures can reveal wider management issues.

Repeated resignations from one team may indicate management or workload problems. Frequent failed probation periods may suggest weaknesses in recruitment or onboarding. Regular settlement agreements may indicate that employee problems are being identified too late.

Employers should therefore consider employee exits as a source of organisational information.

Relevant trends might include:

• turnover by team;
• reasons for resignation;
• length of service at departure;
• failed probation rates;
• redundancy patterns;
• grievance history;
• sickness absence before departure; and
• exit interview themes.

The objective is not to treat every departure as evidence of organisational failure, but to identify recurring patterns that may justify management attention.

29. Planning an Employee Exit

A practical exit process should establish:

Why is the employment ending?

What legal or HR process applies?

What is the termination date?

What notice arrangements apply?

What payments are due?

What work or handover is required?

What company property needs to be returned?

When should systems access change?

What continuing obligations apply?

What should be communicated internally or externally?

Are any legal claims or protected circumstances relevant?

What records should be retained?

Managing the exit should therefore begin before the employee's final day.

The end of employment is the final stage of the employee-management lifecycle. Whether an employee resigns voluntarily, leaves following organisational change or is dismissed after a formal process, employers should ensure that the reason for termination is clear, the appropriate process has been followed and the practical consequences of departure are properly managed.

A controlled exit protects business continuity, reduces avoidable disputes and allows the organisation to bring the employment relationship to a clear and professionally managed conclusion.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section R: When Employers Should Take HR Advice

Many employee issues can and should be handled by line managers as part of ordinary workplace management.

Managers should be capable of setting expectations, providing feedback, discussing attendance, resolving minor workplace problems and addressing early performance or conduct concerns without referring every conversation to HR.

There are, however, points at which an employee issue becomes sufficiently serious, complex or legally sensitive that specialist HR advice can help the employer decide how to proceed.

Recognising these points early can be important. Advice taken before a significant decision is made can help preserve options, while advice sought after dismissal, disciplinary action or another contentious step may be limited to managing the consequences of decisions that have already been taken.

1. When Informal Management Is Not Working

Repeated informal conversations without meaningful improvement can indicate that a different approach is required.

This may occur where an employee continues to:

• underperform;
• arrive late;
• have problematic levels of absence;
• disregard workplace expectations;
• behave inappropriately;
• fail to follow reasonable instructions; or
• create recurring workplace problems.

HR can help the manager review what has already happened and determine whether the issue should now move into a formal process.

This can also help prevent "informal management" continuing indefinitely without the employee understanding the seriousness of the concern.

2. Before Starting a Formal HR Procedure

The transition from ordinary management into formal action is an important stage.

Before starting a disciplinary, capability, grievance or other formal process, employers should understand what issue they are actually trying to resolve and which procedure is appropriate.

HR advice can help establish:

• the nature of the concern;
• what evidence is currently available;
• whether further investigation is required;
• which procedure should apply;
• who should conduct the process;
• what information should be provided to the employee;
• whether previous warnings or management action are relevant; and
• whether additional legal considerations need to be addressed.

Starting with the correct process is generally easier than attempting to correct procedural problems later.

3. Serious Misconduct Allegations

Allegations of serious misconduct should normally trigger HR involvement.

This may include allegations involving:

• dishonesty;
• violence;
• serious insubordination;
• harassment;
• discrimination;
• serious confidentiality breaches;
• significant health and safety breaches;
• misuse of company systems or property; or
• other potentially gross misconduct.

Managers may need immediate guidance about investigation, evidence preservation, suspension and how the employee should be informed of the allegations.

The seriousness of an allegation should not lead the employer to bypass an appropriate process.

HR oversight can help ensure that necessary protective action is taken without prejudging the eventual outcome.

4. Before Suspending an Employee

Suspension can have significant consequences for the employee and employment relationship.

It should not automatically follow every serious allegation.

Before suspending, the employer should consider why suspension is thought necessary and whether alternative arrangements could adequately address the concern.

Possible considerations may include risks to:

• evidence;
• witnesses;
• colleagues;
• customers;
• vulnerable individuals;
• business systems; or
• the integrity of an investigation.

HR advice can help managers assess whether suspension is proportionate and establish how it should be communicated and reviewed.

5. Where Dismissal Could Become an Outcome

Employers should consider taking advice before a process reaches the point where dismissal appears inevitable.

This applies whether the potential reason relates to:

• misconduct;
• poor performance;
• ill-health capability;
• redundancy;
• statutory restrictions;
• breakdown of the employment relationship; or
• another substantial employment issue.

HR can help the employer identify the actual reason being relied upon, review the evidence and assess whether the process has reached a stage where dismissal can properly be considered.

This is particularly important where managers have become frustrated with the employee and may already have formed a strong view about the desired outcome.

The reduction in the ordinary unfair dismissal qualifying period to six months from 1 January 2027, together with removal of the statutory compensatory award cap from the same date, also increases the importance of taking advice before dismissal decisions involving relatively short-service employees.

6. Grievances and Employee Complaints

Formal grievances should normally involve HR oversight.

This becomes particularly important where the complaint concerns:

• the employee's manager;
• senior management;
• bullying;
• harassment;
• discrimination;
• pay or contractual rights;
• workplace safety;
• retaliation;
• another ongoing HR process; or
• several employees.

HR can help determine who should investigate, how the grievance interacts with other management processes and what steps may be required after the outcome.

Formal disciplinary and grievance processes should also take account of the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures.

7. Discrimination Allegations

Allegations of discrimination can significantly increase the risk associated with employee-management decisions.

The allegation may concern a specific incident or arise during an existing performance, attendance or disciplinary process.

Managers should avoid treating a discrimination complaint simply as an attempt to avoid management action.

The employer may need to consider the allegation separately while determining how the original management process should proceed.

HR or legal advice can help identify the issues requiring investigation and ensure subsequent decisions are not improperly influenced by the employee having raised the complaint.

8. Disability and Reasonable Adjustments

Specialist advice may be appropriate where disability is affecting attendance, performance, working arrangements or participation in an HR process.

Employers may need to determine:

• what information is required;
• whether medical evidence should be obtained;
• whether occupational health input would assist;
• what disadvantages the employee is experiencing;
• what adjustments could potentially address those disadvantages;
• whether proposed adjustments are reasonable; and
• how normal management expectations should operate.

These questions can become particularly important where adjustments are disputed or the employer is considering formal action.

9. Long-Term Sickness Absence

Long-term sickness absence can become difficult to manage because the employer needs to balance the employee's health position with the operational need for the role to be performed.

HR advice may assist with:

• maintaining appropriate contact;
• obtaining medical information;
• occupational health referrals;
• return-to-work planning;
• reasonable adjustments;
• alternative duties;
• medical capability procedures; and
• potential termination where continued employment may no longer be sustainable.

Employers should avoid allowing long-term absence to continue without active management simply because the employee remains medically unfit for work.

Equally, decisions about continued employment should not be made without an adequate understanding of the employee's medical position and relevant legal obligations.

10. Pregnancy and Family-Related Issues

HR input may be appropriate where pregnancy, maternity or other family-related rights overlap with significant management decisions.

This can include situations involving:

• performance management;
• attendance;
• redundancy;
• organisational restructuring;
• changes to duties;
• flexible working;
• return from family leave; or
• potential dismissal.

Particular care is required where redundancy affects an employee who may fall within the statutory protected period associated with pregnancy or certain forms of family leave.

Where the protection applies, priority rights relating to suitable alternative vacancies may arise.

The existence of a protected circumstance does not necessarily prevent legitimate management action.

It does mean that the employer should understand the applicable rights and ensure the protected circumstance does not improperly influence the decision.

11. Whistleblowing

Potential whistleblowing should be escalated promptly.

Employees do not always describe their concerns as whistleblowing.

A manager may receive an email alleging unsafe practices, regulatory breaches, financial wrongdoing or other serious organisational failures without recognising that additional legal protections may be engaged.

The organisation should consider both the substance of the concern and how the employee is treated afterwards.

Where performance, conduct or other management concerns already exist, HR oversight can help ensure those issues continue to be managed on their own evidence.

12. Workplace Investigations

Complex or serious allegations may require a structured workplace investigation.

HR can help determine:

• the scope of the investigation;
• who should investigate;
• what allegations need to be examined;
• what evidence should be preserved;
• which witnesses may be relevant;
• how information should be documented; and
• what should happen when the investigation concludes.

Where senior employees or HR personnel are themselves involved in the allegations, an external investigator may sometimes be appropriate.

The objective should be to establish a credible factual basis for whatever decision follows.

13. Several HR Processes Running at the Same Time

Specialist advice becomes particularly valuable where employee issues overlap.

For example, an employee may:

• be undergoing performance management;
• become absent with stress;
• raise a grievance against their manager;
• allege disability;
• make a whistleblowing disclosure; and
• refuse to attend subsequent meetings.

Managing each development independently can create inconsistent decisions.

HR can map the different issues, determine how they interact and establish which matters should proceed, pause or be investigated.

A coordinated strategy is often more effective than allowing several managers to respond separately to different parts of the same employee problem.

14. Organisational Change and Redundancy

Employers should involve HR early where organisational change could affect employees' roles or continued employment.

Advice may be required where the organisation is considering:

• restructuring;
• redundancies;
• changing contractual terms;
• relocating employees;
• changing working hours;
• removing or combining roles;
• introducing new organisational structures; or
• transferring business activities.

Early involvement allows the employment process to be considered alongside the commercial proposal.

This can help prevent the organisation announcing decisions before understanding what consultation, selection, redundancy protection or contractual issues may arise.

15. Changing Employment Terms

Managers should seek advice before imposing significant changes to employment terms.

Changes may involve:

• pay;
• hours;
• workplace location;
• benefits;
• duties;
• status; or
• working arrangements.

The employer should understand whether employee agreement is required, whether contractual flexibility exists and what process may be appropriate if agreement cannot be reached.

A commercially desirable change is not necessarily one that can simply be imposed through management instruction.

Where dismissal and re-engagement is being considered, specialist legal advice should be taken before the employer proceeds. This is a high-risk area and the statutory framework is changing under the Employment Rights Act 2025 reforms.

16. Difficult Senior Employee Cases

Employee issues involving directors, senior executives or other strategically important employees can require additional care.

These cases may involve:

• complex contractual arrangements;
• substantial remuneration;
• bonuses or incentives;
• restrictive covenants;
• confidential information;
• shareholder or directorship issues;
• reputational concerns; or
• significant termination payments.

The commercial consequences of mishandling the exit may be materially greater than in an ordinary employee case.

Specialist legal advice may therefore be appropriate alongside HR management.

17. Threatened Employment Tribunal Proceedings

Employers should consider obtaining advice where an employee threatens legal proceedings or indicates that ACAS or solicitors are becoming involved.

The organisation should continue managing the underlying employee issue rather than becoming paralysed by the threat of litigation.

However, it may need to review:

• the factual history;
• relevant correspondence;
• management records;
• potential legal claims;
• evidence preservation;
• future communications; and
• the risks associated with proposed next steps.

Early review can help identify weaknesses in the employer's position while there may still be an opportunity to address them.

18. When Managers Have Lost Objectivity

Sometimes the issue requiring HR intervention is not simply the employee's behaviour.

The manager may have become personally involved in the dispute.

Warning signs can include:

• highly emotional communications;
• repeated arguments;
• personal criticism of the employee;
• a stated determination to dismiss;
• unwillingness to consider the employee's explanation;
• disagreement becoming personalised; or
• a grievance being raised against the manager.

Where objectivity is in doubt, HR may need to provide greater oversight or arrange for another manager to take responsibility for particular decisions.

This protects both the employee and the organisation.

19. When Internal HR Should Take Legal Advice

Not every complex employee issue can be resolved through HR expertise alone.

Employment law advice may be appropriate where the organisation faces significant legal uncertainty or potential exposure.

Examples may include:

• high-risk dismissals;
• whistleblowing;
• discrimination allegations;
• complex disability cases;
• senior executive exits;
• substantial contractual disputes;
• collective redundancy;
• business transfers;
• dismissal and re-engagement;
• threatened litigation;
• restrictive covenant disputes; or
• proposed settlement agreements.

Legal advice can help the organisation assess risk and determine the available options while HR continues to manage the practical employment process.

20. Using External HR Support

Smaller organisations may not have an internal HR team.

Managers and business owners may therefore need access to external HR support for employee issues that exceed ordinary line management.

External advisers can assist with matters such as:

• drafting correspondence;
• planning formal processes;
• preparing for meetings;
• conducting investigations;
• managing performance or absence cases;
• handling grievances;
• supporting organisational change; and
• advising on difficult employee decisions.

The employer should still retain ownership of the commercial and management decision.

External HR support should enable the organisation to manage employees effectively rather than remove management responsibility altogether.

21. The Value of Early Advice

Employers often seek advice immediately before dismissal.

By that point, the organisation may already have:

• followed the wrong procedure;
• failed to investigate;
• made damaging written comments;
• promised an outcome;
• ignored relevant medical information;
• failed to address a grievance;
• imposed contractual changes; or
• communicated that a decision has already been made.

Advice can still help, but the available options may be narrower.

Early advice allows the employer to structure the process before positions become fixed.

A useful principle is to seek support when the employer first recognises that an employee issue could reasonably result in formal action, significant workplace change or termination.

22. A Practical HR Escalation Test

Managers can use a simple escalation test when deciding whether to seek support.

HR involvement should be considered where the answer to any of the following is yes:

Could this result in dismissal or another serious sanction?

Has the employee raised discrimination, disability, pregnancy, whistleblowing or another protected issue?

Is a formal grievance involved?

Are the facts seriously disputed?

Could an investigation be required?

Is the employee absent with a significant health condition?

Are contractual terms being changed?

Is organisational restructuring involved?

Is the manager personally involved in the dispute?

Has the employee threatened legal proceedings?

Is the organisation uncertain which procedure applies?

Would the business be concerned if its handling of the issue had to be explained externally?

If so, obtaining advice before the next significant step can help the organisation retain control of the process.

Effective HR advice should not prevent managers from managing. Its purpose is to help employers make informed decisions, use the appropriate process and understand the risks associated with the options available.

The strongest employee-management framework is therefore one in which managers confidently deal with ordinary workplace issues while recognising the point at which complexity, seriousness or employment law risk requires specialist support.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section S: Managing Employees Checklist

Effective employee management depends on consistent day-to-day practices rather than waiting until a serious problem develops.

Employers can use the following checklist to review whether the basic structures are in place to manage employees effectively and whether individual employee issues are being handled appropriately.

1. Employment Foundations

Check that:

• employees have appropriate written employment terms;
• roles and responsibilities are sufficiently clear;
• job descriptions reflect the work employees are actually expected to perform;
• reporting lines and management responsibilities are understood;
• workplace policies are current and accessible;
• employees know the standards of conduct expected;
• managers understand which decisions they are authorised to make;
• employees know how to raise workplace concerns; and
• there are clear routes for escalating employee issues to HR.

2. Starting Employment

For new employees:

• provide an appropriate induction;
• explain the employee's role and responsibilities;
• set initial objectives and performance expectations;
• explain relevant workplace policies;
• clarify attendance and absence-reporting requirements;
• provide required training;
• identify any support needed to perform the role;
• actively manage the probation period where applicable;
• address early performance or conduct concerns promptly; and
• confirm the outcome of probation appropriately.

Do not allow probation periods to expire without meaningful assessment simply because no serious problem has arisen.

3. Day-to-Day Management

Managers should:

• communicate priorities clearly;
• allocate work appropriately;
• provide regular feedback;
• recognise good performance;
• identify problems early;
• hold appropriate one-to-one discussions;
• review workloads;
• understand obstacles affecting performance;
• support employee development;
• maintain appropriate professional boundaries; and
• keep records of significant management issues where necessary.

Day-to-day management should create a continuous understanding of how the employee is performing rather than relying solely on annual appraisal processes.

4. Performance Concerns

Where performance is below the required standard:

• identify the specific shortfall;
• confirm the standard expected;
• use evidence and examples;
• discuss the concern with the employee;
• obtain the employee's explanation;
• consider whether expectations were sufficiently clear;
• identify any training or support needs;
• consider whether health or disability may be relevant;
• establish what improvement is required;
• set an appropriate review period;
• document significant discussions;
• review whether improvement occurs; and
• escalate to a formal capability or performance process where appropriate.

Avoid deciding that an employee is incapable before understanding why performance has declined.

5. Conduct Concerns

Where employee behaviour is causing concern:

• identify the specific conduct involved;
• check relevant policies and workplace rules;
• establish the available facts;
• distinguish allegations from proven facts;
• obtain the employee's explanation where appropriate;
• determine whether further investigation is required;
• consider whether the matter is minor or potentially serious;
• consider whether informal management is sufficient;
• involve HR where formal disciplinary action may be required;
• consider relevant mitigating circumstances;
• apply sanctions proportionately; and
• maintain an appropriate record of the process and outcome.

Do not assume that an allegation of misconduct proves that misconduct occurred.

6. Sickness Absence and Attendance

When managing absence:

• maintain accurate attendance records;
• ensure employees understand sickness-reporting requirements;
• monitor patterns as well as individual absences;
• conduct appropriate return-to-work discussions;
• distinguish genuine sickness from separate conduct concerns;
• consider whether an underlying health condition exists;
• maintain appropriate contact during long-term absence;
• obtain medical or occupational health information where necessary;
• consider disability and reasonable adjustments;
• identify and manage pregnancy-related sickness appropriately;
• explore return-to-work options;
• assess whether attendance remains sustainable;
• use a formal absence or capability process where appropriate; and
• take advice before considering dismissal for sickness or attendance reasons.

Attendance triggers should prompt management consideration rather than determine outcomes automatically.

7. Employee Concerns and Workplace Relationships

Where an employee raises a workplace concern:

• listen to what the employee is saying;
• establish whether the concern is informal or formal;
• identify the specific allegations;
• consider whether immediate action is required;
• determine whether an investigation is necessary;
• provide an alternative reporting route where the manager is involved;
• consider whether bullying, harassment or discrimination is alleged;
• identify possible whistleblowing issues;
• avoid retaliatory treatment;
• determine whether mediation or informal resolution may be appropriate;
• follow the grievance procedure where required;
• communicate the outcome appropriately; and
• consider how working relationships will be managed afterwards.

Do not assume that resolving the formal complaint automatically repairs the workplace relationship.

8. Individual Employee Circumstances

Before taking significant management action, consider whether the employee's individual circumstances are relevant.

Check for issues involving:

• disability;
• physical or mental health;
• pregnancy or maternity;
• family-related rights;
• caring responsibilities;
• flexible working;
• religion or belief;
• neurodiversity;
• bereavement;
• significant personal circumstances; or
• another matter potentially affecting how the employee should be managed.

Consider whether reasonable adjustments, temporary support or another appropriate workplace arrangement may be required.

Individual consideration does not mean abandoning legitimate workplace standards.

9. Informal or Formal Action

Before deciding how to proceed, ask:

Is this a minor issue that could reasonably be resolved through ordinary management?

Has the employee previously been told about the concern?

Has informal management already been attempted?

Has sufficient improvement occurred?

Is the issue serious enough to require formal action immediately?

Are the facts disputed?

Is an investigation required?

Which HR procedure applies?

Could the process ultimately result in a warning or dismissal?

Are there legal or protected circumstances requiring additional consideration?

Use the least formal intervention reasonably capable of addressing the issue, while recognising when a formal procedure has become necessary.

10. Fairness and Consistency

For significant employee decisions:

• establish the relevant facts;
• give the employee an appropriate opportunity to respond;
• consider their explanation;
• identify relevant mitigating circumstances;
• check how genuinely comparable situations have been handled;
• consider any legitimate reasons for different treatment;
• avoid personal assumptions;
• apply workplace policies appropriately;
• ensure the proposed response is proportionate;
• avoid predetermined outcomes; and
• record the reasons for significant decisions.

Ask whether the decision could be explained objectively to someone who had no previous involvement in the case.

11. Employee Documentation

Maintain appropriate records of:

• employment terms;
• role changes;
• significant management discussions;
• objectives;
• performance concerns;
• support and training;
• attendance;
• workplace adjustments;
• grievances;
• investigations;
• disciplinary processes;
• formal warnings;
• employee explanations;
• significant decisions; and
• termination arrangements.

Records should be factual, professional and proportionate.

Avoid emotive comments, speculation about employee motives and internal messages that could suggest a predetermined outcome.

12. Line Manager Responsibilities

Managers should understand:

• what employee-management decisions they can make;
• when HR approval is required;
• how to set and communicate standards;
• how to give constructive feedback;
• how to conduct difficult conversations;
• how to identify performance and conduct issues;
• how to manage attendance;
• how to document significant concerns;
• how to recognise discrimination and disability issues;
• how to identify potential whistleblowing;
• when a formal process may be required; and
• when an issue should be escalated.

Managers should manage employees actively rather than referring every ordinary workplace issue to HR.

Equally, they should not attempt to manage high-risk employment matters without appropriate support.

13. Organisational Change

Before implementing significant workforce changes:

• identify the commercial objective;
• determine which roles and employees may be affected;
• review relevant employment contracts;
• establish whether contractual terms are changing;
• consider whether redundancy may arise;
• identify any consultation requirements;
• consider whether collective obligations may apply;
• assess equality implications;
• identify employees requiring individual consideration;
• identify employees who may fall within pregnancy or family-leave redundancy protection;
• consider alternatives to redundancy;
• identify potential alternative employment;
• plan communications carefully; and
• involve HR before decisions are presented as final.

The employment process should be considered as part of change planning rather than after the commercial decision has already been announced.

14. Employee Exits

Before employment ends, confirm:

• the reason for termination;
• the applicable process;
• the termination date;
• notice arrangements;
• outstanding holiday;
• final pay;
• bonuses or commission where relevant;
• redundancy or termination payments where applicable;
• handover requirements;
• company property;
• systems access;
• confidentiality obligations;
• restrictive covenants where relevant;
• communication arrangements;
• reference policy; and
• records that need to be retained.

Where dismissal is involved, ensure the reason, evidence and procedure have been reviewed before the decision is implemented.

Employers should also check which unfair dismissal qualifying rules apply at the time of termination, particularly given the reduction from two years to six months due from 1 January 2027.

15. HR Escalation

Consider seeking HR advice where:

• informal management has repeatedly failed;
• formal disciplinary action is being considered;
• serious misconduct is alleged;
• suspension is proposed;
• a formal grievance has been raised;
• discrimination or harassment is alleged;
• disability affects the issue being managed;
• reasonable adjustments are disputed;
• long-term sickness is involved;
• pregnancy or family-related rights are relevant;
• whistleblowing may be involved;
• contractual changes are proposed;
• redundancy or restructuring is planned;
• several HR processes overlap;
• a manager is personally involved in the dispute;
• Employment Tribunal proceedings are threatened; or
• dismissal could become an outcome.

16. ACAS Code Check

Where formal disciplinary or grievance action is being taken, check whether the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures applies and ensure the process reflects its requirements.

Relevant checks may include:

• Have the facts been established appropriately?
• Has the employee been informed of the issue?
• Has the employee been given an appropriate opportunity to respond?
• Has the matter been handled without unreasonable delay?
• Have applicable accompaniment rights been respected?
• Has the decision been communicated clearly?
• Has an appropriate appeal opportunity been provided?

An unreasonable failure to comply with the ACAS Code can affect compensation in relevant successful claims by up to 25%.

17. Before Making a Significant Employee Decision

Before implementing a warning, dismissal, major contractual change or another significant decision, ask:

What exactly is the employee-management issue?

What evidence supports our understanding of the situation?

What does the employee say?

Have we investigated where necessary?

What policy or procedure applies?

Have we followed it appropriately?

Does the ACAS Code apply?

Are there relevant contractual rights?

Could discrimination, disability, whistleblowing or another statutory protection be relevant?

Are pregnancy or family-related protections relevant?

Have comparable situations been considered?

Are there reasonable alternatives?

Is the proposed action proportionate?

Has the decision genuinely remained open until the relevant process was completed?

Can we clearly explain and evidence why we are taking this action?

Have we checked whether recent employment law reforms affect the decision?

If the employer cannot answer these questions confidently, further investigation, management consideration or specialist advice may be required before proceeding.

18. Employee Management Framework

Employers can reduce many employee-management problems by following a consistent framework:

Set clear expectations

Manage and communicate regularly

Identify problems early

Establish the facts

Listen to the employee

Consider individual circumstances

Provide appropriate support

Use informal management where suitable

Escalate to a formal procedure where necessary

Make evidence-based and proportionate decisions

Document significant actions

Review the outcome

Take specialist advice where the risk requires it

This framework can be applied throughout the employment relationship, from onboarding and probation through performance, conduct, attendance, workplace change and eventual exit.

The objective is not to eliminate every employee problem. Employers will inevitably encounter poor performance, absence, misconduct, workplace disagreements and difficult employment decisions.

Effective employee management provides the organisation with a structured way to identify those issues, respond at the appropriate level and make decisions that support both operational requirements and lawful, fair treatment of employees.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section T: Frequently Asked Questions

1. What does managing employees involve?

Managing employees involves overseeing the employment relationship from the employee's arrival in the organisation through to their eventual departure.

It includes setting expectations, allocating work, monitoring performance, managing attendance, addressing conduct, supporting development, responding to employee concerns and dealing with changes in individual or organisational circumstances.

Effective employee management also requires employers to recognise when an ordinary management issue should be escalated into a formal HR process.

2. How can employers manage employees effectively?

Effective employee management starts with clear expectations and regular communication.

Employees should understand their role, responsibilities and the standards expected of them. Managers should provide feedback, identify problems early and give employees an opportunity to explain difficulties before deciding what action is required.

Employers should also have appropriate workplace policies, maintain proportionate records and ensure managers know when an issue requires HR support.

The objective is to resolve ordinary workplace issues through effective management while using formal procedures where the seriousness or persistence of the problem requires them.

3. What is the difference between employee management and HR?

Employee management is primarily concerned with the day-to-day management of the employment relationship.

Line managers typically allocate work, set objectives, provide feedback and deal with routine performance, attendance and workplace issues.

HR provides the framework and specialist support for those activities. This may include employment policies, manager guidance, formal procedures, investigations, employee relations and employment law risk management.

Effective organisations generally require both functions to work together: managers manage employees while HR provides advice, structure and oversight.

4. When should an employee problem be dealt with informally?

Informal management may be appropriate where a problem is relatively minor, has arisen for the first time and appears capable of being resolved through straightforward management intervention.

For example, a manager may discuss an isolated performance issue, occasional lateness or a minor workplace disagreement directly with the employee.

The employee should still understand what the concern is and what improvement is expected.

Where the issue is serious, persistent or potentially capable of resulting in a formal sanction, a structured HR procedure may be more appropriate.

5. When should an employer use a formal HR procedure?

Formal action may be required where informal management has not resolved an issue or where the seriousness of the matter means informal intervention would not be appropriate.

This could include persistent poor performance, repeated attendance problems, alleged misconduct, serious workplace complaints, grievances, bullying or harassment allegations and other circumstances where formal employment action may result.

The employer should identify the underlying issue and use the appropriate procedure rather than automatically treating every formal employee problem as disciplinary.

6. How should an employer deal with poor performance?

The employer should first identify the specific performance standard that is not being met.

The employee should understand the concern and normally be given an opportunity to explain why the problem has arisen.

The employer should consider whether factors such as unclear objectives, inadequate training, workload, resources, health or disability are relevant.

Depending on the circumstances, the employer may provide additional support and establish a period for improvement.

Persistent underperformance may require a formal capability or performance-management process.

7. Can an employer discipline an employee for poor performance?

Poor performance and misconduct are not necessarily the same.

A performance problem may involve an employee being unable to achieve the required standard despite attempting to do so. Misconduct generally concerns behaviour, including situations where an employee deliberately fails to comply with legitimate workplace requirements.

Employers should identify the nature of the problem before deciding which procedure to use.

Treating a genuine capability issue as misconduct can result in the wrong management approach being applied.

8. How should an employer manage a difficult employee?

Employers should focus on the specific workplace issue rather than labelling an individual as a "difficult employee".

The relevant concern may involve performance, conduct, attendance, workplace relationships, refusal to follow instructions or repeated complaints.

The employer should establish the facts, understand the employee's explanation and determine what management intervention is appropriate.

Where several problems overlap, HR oversight may help the organisation develop a coordinated approach rather than responding separately to each new development.

9. How should employers manage sickness absence?

Employers should maintain accurate absence records, operate clear reporting arrangements and discuss attendance concerns with employees where necessary.

The appropriate response will depend on whether the issue involves occasional sickness, repeated short-term absence or long-term ill health.

Where an underlying medical condition may be involved, further information or occupational health advice may be appropriate.

Employers should also consider whether the employee may be disabled and whether reasonable adjustments are required.

Pregnancy-related sickness should be identified and managed separately where appropriate rather than simply being aggregated with ordinary sickness absence in a way that disadvantages the employee because of pregnancy.

Persistent or long-term absence can potentially result in formal capability action, but significant decisions should be based on an adequate understanding of the employee's circumstances.

10. Can an employer set attendance standards?

Employers can set reasonable attendance expectations and manage attendance levels that are affecting the organisation.

Attendance thresholds or trigger points can help identify cases requiring management review, but they should not necessarily determine the outcome automatically.

The employer should consider why the employee has been absent and whether disability, pregnancy or another relevant circumstance affects how the absence should be managed.

11. How should employers deal with employee complaints?

The employer should first understand what the employee is complaining about.

Some relatively minor concerns may be capable of informal resolution.

Formal grievances, serious allegations and complaints involving bullying, harassment, discrimination or other significant wrongdoing may require a more structured process and investigation.

Employees should have a credible route for raising concerns, including an alternative route where the complaint concerns their immediate manager.

12. What should an employer do if an employee raises a grievance during disciplinary or performance management?

The employer should consider how the grievance relates to the existing process.

A grievance does not necessarily mean disciplinary or performance management must automatically stop.

In some circumstances, the processes can continue alongside each other. In others, the grievance may raise issues that need to be investigated before the original process can fairly proceed.

The employer should consider the substance of the complaint rather than applying an automatic rule.

13. Can an employer manage an employee who has made a discrimination complaint?

Raising a discrimination complaint does not generally prevent legitimate employee management from continuing.

An employer may still need to address genuine performance, attendance or conduct concerns.

However, the employer should ensure that subsequent action is based on legitimate workplace reasons and not improperly influenced by the employee having raised the complaint.

The discrimination allegation itself may also require investigation.

14. Can an employer manage the performance of a disabled employee?

Disabled employees can be subject to legitimate performance management.

The employer should, however, consider whether disability is contributing to the performance concern and whether reasonable adjustments may be required.

This could involve adjustments to working arrangements, equipment, communication, duties or the management process itself depending on the circumstances.

The performance standard and the support reasonably required to enable the employee to meet it should therefore both be considered.

15. What should an employer do if an employee refuses a management instruction?

The employer should first establish why the employee is refusing.

The employee may believe the instruction is unsafe, outside their contractual duties or otherwise inappropriate.

The employer should consider whether the instruction is reasonable and whether the employee has a legitimate explanation for refusing it.

Where an employee deliberately refuses a reasonable management instruction without adequate justification, the matter may potentially become a conduct issue.

16. Does every employee complaint need a workplace investigation?

No.

The level of investigation should be proportionate to the issue.

A straightforward misunderstanding may be capable of resolution through management discussion, while disputed allegations of serious misconduct, bullying, harassment or discrimination may require a structured investigation.

The employer should determine what facts need to be established before deciding what process is appropriate.

17. Should employers document informal employee conversations?

Significant informal management discussions can be documented even where no formal procedure has started.

A brief record may confirm the concern discussed, the employee's explanation, any support agreed, the improvement expected and when the matter will be reviewed.

The record should accurately reflect the informal status of the discussion.

Employers should avoid effectively issuing formal warnings while describing them as informal management action.

18. How much information should managers record about employees?

Records should be relevant, accurate and proportionate.

Employers do not need to document every ordinary workplace conversation.

More detailed records are generally appropriate where an issue is significant, repeated, disputed or could ultimately result in formal employment action.

Managers should use factual and professional language and avoid unnecessary personal opinions or speculation about employees.

19. Can an employer change an employee's duties?

Some changes to duties may fall within ordinary management arrangements, particularly where they are reasonably connected with the employee's existing role.

More substantial changes may raise contractual issues.

The employer should consider the employee's existing terms, the nature and extent of the proposed change and whether agreement is required.

Significant changes should not automatically be imposed simply because there is a business reason for making them.

20. Can an employer change an employee's working hours?

The answer will depend on the contractual arrangements and the circumstances of the proposed change.

Employers should establish whether they have an appropriate contractual basis for changing hours and consider the practical impact on affected employees.

Changes may also interact with issues such as flexible working, disability, religion or caring responsibilities.

Substantial contractual changes should therefore be considered carefully before implementation.

21. When should an employer involve HR?

HR should generally become involved where an issue is moving beyond ordinary management or presents material employment risk.

Examples include formal disciplinary action, grievances, serious misconduct, workplace investigations, discrimination allegations, disability issues, long-term sickness, whistleblowing, redundancy, significant contractual changes and potential dismissal.

Managers should also seek support where several employee issues overlap or where they are personally involved in the dispute.

22. When should an employer take legal advice?

Legal advice may be appropriate where the potential consequences or legal complexity are significant.

Examples can include high-risk dismissals, discrimination, whistleblowing, complex disability cases, senior employee exits, collective redundancy, business transfers, contractual disputes, dismissal and re-engagement, settlement agreements and threatened Employment Tribunal proceedings.

Taking advice before a significant decision is made can provide the employer with more options than seeking advice only after action has already been taken.

23. Can an employer dismiss a difficult employee?

The description of an employee as "difficult" is not itself a reason or process for dismissal.

The employer should identify the actual employment issue.

There may be legitimate concerns involving conduct, capability, attendance or another substantial matter, but these should be evidenced and managed through the appropriate process.

Where dismissal is being considered, the employer should understand the reason for termination, the employee's rights, the evidence and the procedure required.

24. Can an employer dismiss an employee during probation?

Probation does not remove all contractual or statutory employment protections.

An employer may decide that an employee has not successfully completed probation, but it should still identify the reason for termination and comply with applicable contractual requirements.

Particular caution may be required where the employee's circumstances involve discrimination, disability, pregnancy, whistleblowing, health and safety or another protected matter.

At present, ordinary unfair dismissal generally requires two years' qualifying service, subject to important exceptions. From 1 January 2027, the ordinary qualifying period is due to reduce to six months.

This makes active probation management and timely review increasingly important.

25. Can sickness absence result in dismissal?

Long-term or persistent sickness absence can potentially result in dismissal in some circumstances.

Before reaching that stage, employers should normally understand the employee's medical position, consider the likelihood of a return to work and assess whether reasonable adjustments or other alternatives are available.

Where disability is involved, additional legal considerations may apply.

Dismissal should therefore generally be considered only after the employer has properly managed the underlying absence or capability issue.

26. What should an employer do before dismissing an employee?

Before dismissal, the employer should be clear about the reason being relied upon and the evidence supporting that reason.

It should consider whether an appropriate process has been followed, whether the employee has had an opportunity to respond and whether relevant alternatives or mitigating circumstances need to be considered.

The employer should also identify whether any protected rights or characteristics affect the decision.

Where the legal position or process is uncertain, specialist advice should be taken before termination is implemented.

27. What changes to unfair dismissal should employers know about?

At present, an employee will generally need two years' qualifying service to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim, subject to important exceptions.

From 1 January 2027, the ordinary qualifying period is due to reduce to six months.

The statutory cap on the compensatory award for ordinary unfair dismissal is also due to be removed from that date.

Employers should therefore review probation, performance management and dismissal processes before these reforms take effect and should not assume historic short-service dismissal practices will remain appropriate.

28. What is the ACAS Code and why does it matter?

The ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures provides guidance on the reasonable handling of formal disciplinary and grievance matters.

It addresses matters such as establishing the facts, notifying the employee of the issue, holding meetings, allowing employees to respond and providing an opportunity to appeal.

Employment Tribunals can take the Code into account in relevant proceedings.

Where a claim to which the Code applies succeeds, an unreasonable failure to follow it can result in compensation being adjusted by up to 25%.

29. Are employees on maternity or family leave protected during redundancy?

Additional statutory redundancy protection can apply during pregnancy and protected periods connected with certain forms of family leave.

Where the protection applies and a suitable alternative vacancy exists, the employee may have priority entitlement to be offered that vacancy rather than simply competing for it alongside other employees.

Depending on the circumstances, the protected period can continue beyond the leave itself and may extend for up to 18 months from the relevant statutory reference point.

Employers should identify protected employees early in the redundancy process and seek advice where the applicable priority rules are unclear.

30. Can an employer dismiss and rehire employees on new terms?

Dismissal and re-engagement, sometimes referred to as "fire and rehire", has historically been used in some circumstances where employers have been unable to secure agreement to contractual changes.

It is a high-risk area and should not be treated as a routine method of imposing new employment terms.

The legal framework is also changing under reforms being introduced through the Employment Rights Act 2025.

Employers considering dismissal and re-engagement should therefore obtain specialist legal advice and verify the statutory framework in force before proceeding.

31. What is the most important principle when managing employees?

The central principle is to manage the issue rather than the individual.

Employers should identify the specific performance, conduct, attendance, relationship or organisational concern, establish the relevant facts and give the employee an appropriate opportunity to respond.

Management action should then be proportionate to the circumstances, with individual circumstances and employment rights considered where relevant.

Clear expectations, early intervention, good documentation and appropriate escalation provide the foundation for effective employee management throughout the employment relationship.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section U: Conclusion

Managing employees is a continuous process that runs throughout the employment relationship. It begins with recruitment, onboarding and setting expectations, continues through day-to-day management, performance, conduct, attendance and employee relations, and ultimately extends to organisational change and employee exits.

The strongest employee-management frameworks do not rely on formal HR procedures to solve every problem.

They create an environment in which managers understand what is expected of them, employees understand what is expected of them and ordinary workplace issues are identified and addressed before they become more difficult.

1. Clear Expectations Provide the Starting Point

Employees cannot reasonably be expected to meet standards they do not understand.

Employers should therefore establish clear expectations around:

• roles and responsibilities;
• performance;
• attendance;
• conduct;
• communication;
• workplace behaviour;
• management instructions; and
• organisational policies.

These expectations should begin when employment starts and continue to be reinforced as roles, teams and organisational requirements change.

2. Regular Communication Supports Effective Management

Employee management should not consist of long periods of silence interrupted by formal HR intervention.

Regular communication gives managers opportunities to recognise good work, clarify priorities, identify problems and understand circumstances affecting employees.

It also gives employees an opportunity to raise concerns before those concerns become established workplace disputes.

Managers who communicate regularly are generally better positioned to distinguish an isolated problem from a developing pattern requiring further action.

3. Early Intervention Can Prevent Escalation

Many serious employee-management problems begin as relatively minor issues.

A missed deadline becomes persistent underperformance. Occasional lateness develops into an attendance problem. Friction between colleagues becomes a grievance. A minor behavioural concern develops into repeated misconduct.

Managers should therefore address genuine concerns when they arise.

Early intervention does not necessarily mean formal action.

In many cases, a clear conversation about the problem, the employee's explanation and the required improvement may be sufficient.

4. Informal Management Has an Important Role

Not every employee issue requires a disciplinary hearing, capability procedure or formal investigation.

Effective line management should resolve many relatively minor workplace problems.

Informal management can allow employers to:

• clarify expectations;
• correct misunderstandings;
• provide feedback;
• identify support needs;
• address minor conduct concerns;
• resolve workplace tensions; and
• agree practical improvements.

The approach should nevertheless be sufficiently clear that the employee understands what has been discussed and what is expected next.

5. Employers Should Recognise When Formal Action Is Required

Informal management should not become a reason for avoiding necessary formal action.

Where problems are serious, repeated or capable of resulting in significant employment consequences, the employer may need to move into an appropriate formal procedure.

This could involve performance management, disciplinary action, sickness capability, grievance handling, workplace investigation, redundancy consultation or another relevant HR process.

The transition should be clear so that the employee understands the status of the process and the potential consequences.

6. Manage the Issue Rather Than the Individual

Employers should avoid allowing descriptions such as "difficult", "unreliable", "negative" or "poor attitude" to become substitutes for identifying the actual management concern.

The employer should instead ask:

What specifically is happening?

What workplace standard is affected?

What evidence is available?

What does the employee say?

What needs to change?

What management response is appropriate?

This keeps employee management focused on identifiable workplace issues rather than personality judgements.

7. Individual Circumstances Matter

Consistency does not require identical treatment in every situation.

Employees may have different health conditions, disabilities, family responsibilities, contractual arrangements or other circumstances that legitimately affect how an issue should be managed.

Employers should therefore combine consistent organisational standards with appropriate consideration of the individual case.

This is particularly important where disability, discrimination, pregnancy, family-related rights, whistleblowing or other statutory protections may be relevant.

8. Documentation Supports Better Decisions

Appropriate documentation helps employers understand how an employee issue developed and what management action has already been taken.

Records should be factual, proportionate and professional.

They should capture relevant employee explanations as well as management concerns.

The purpose of documentation should be to support genuine management rather than retrospectively manufacture a case against an employee.

A reliable record becomes particularly important where an issue progresses from informal management into formal action or dismissal.

9. Line Managers Need Training and Support

Line managers are responsible for much of the organisation's day-to-day employee management.

They should therefore be equipped to:

• set expectations;
• provide feedback;
• identify problems;
• conduct difficult conversations;
• listen to employees;
• maintain appropriate records;
• recognise legal warning signs; and
• know when to involve HR.

Policies alone cannot create effective employee management if managers do not know how to apply them in practice.

10. HR Should Support Rather Than Replace Management

HR has an important role in providing structure, consistency and specialist support.

However, routine people management remains a management responsibility.

The most effective relationship is generally one in which managers retain responsibility for managing their employees while HR supports them with complex, formal or legally sensitive issues.

This allows HR resources to be concentrated where they add the greatest value while managers remain accountable for the performance and functioning of their teams.

11. Difficult Decisions Can Still Be Legitimate

Fair employee management does not require employers to tolerate indefinitely poor performance, unacceptable conduct, unsustainable absence or other serious workplace problems.

Employers can take legitimate management action where the circumstances justify it.

This can ultimately include dismissal.

The important questions are whether the employer understands the genuine reason for its decision, has sufficient evidence, has considered the employee's circumstances and has followed an appropriate process.

Legal compliance should support good management rather than become a reason for avoiding necessary management decisions.

12. Employment Law Risk Should Be Identified Early

Some employee issues require greater caution because statutory protections may affect the employer's options or the process that should be followed.

Employers should recognise potential issues involving:

• unfair dismissal;
• discrimination;
• disability and reasonable adjustments;
• pregnancy and maternity;
• family-related rights;
• whistleblowing;
• health and safety;
• harassment;
• contractual rights;
• redundancy;
• working time;
• data protection; and
• right to work.

Early identification allows the employer to take these considerations into account before significant decisions are made.

13. Employment Law Is Changing

Employers should also recognise that the employment law framework is changing through reforms being implemented during 2026 and 2027.

In particular, the ordinary unfair dismissal qualifying period is due to reduce from two years to six months from 1 January 2027, while the statutory cap on the compensatory award for ordinary unfair dismissal is due to be removed from the same date.

Other reforms under the Employment Rights Act 2025 affect important areas of workforce management and are being implemented in stages.

Employers should therefore keep employment contracts, HR policies, probation arrangements, manager guidance and formal procedures under review and check the law in force when making significant employment decisions.

14. Effective Employee Management Is a Business Discipline

Managing employees should not be viewed solely as an HR compliance exercise.

Effective management affects:

• productivity;
• employee retention;
• workplace culture;
• absence;
• customer service;
• management time;
• operational resilience;
• workforce planning; and
• employment risk.

Organisations that manage employees consistently are better positioned to address problems before they become disruptive and to make difficult decisions when necessary.

The objective is not to eliminate workplace disagreement or guarantee that every employee relationship will succeed.

It is to create a management framework capable of dealing with the full range of situations that arise during employment.

15. Building a Sustainable Employee Management Framework

A sustainable approach to managing employees combines:

• clear employment terms;
• well-defined roles;
• appropriate workplace policies;
• trained line managers;
• regular communication;
• early intervention;
• proportionate documentation;
• fair and consistent decision-making;
• appropriate formal procedures;
• HR escalation routes;
• employment law awareness; and
• specialist advice where necessary.

These elements allow employers to manage employees confidently throughout the employment relationship.

DavidsonMorris supports employers with the full range of employee-management issues, from day-to-day HR advisory support and workplace procedures through to complex employee relations, organisational change and high-risk employment decisions.

Taking advice at an early stage can help employers identify the appropriate management route, understand the risks and retain control of difficult employee situations before positions become entrenched.

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section V: Glossary

 

↑ Back to top

 

 

Section W: Useful Links & Resources

The following official resources provide further information for employers managing employees in the UK.

Employment law and HR requirements change over time. Employers should check that they are relying on the current version of legislation, statutory guidance and ACAS guidance when making significant employment decisions.

 

↑ Back to top