Undertaking A Disciplinary Interview

Undertaking a disciplinary interview is a critical step in a formal disciplinary procedure. It is the employee’s opportunity to present their side of the story in response to formal allegations. A structured, fair, and impartial process is vital to maintain legal compliance, organizational standards, and employee trust.

Key Steps for a Fair Disciplinary Interview

The process is generally divided into preparation, the meeting itself, and follow-up.

1. Pre-Interview Preparation

• Thorough Investigation: The interview should only occur after a complete and impartial investigation. All facts, evidence (emails, witness statements, records), and mitigating circumstances must be gathered and reviewed.
• Formal Written Invitation: The employee must be formally invited to the interview in writing. This letter should clearly state:
  • The specific allegations of misconduct or poor performance.
  • The evidence that will be used.
  • The date, time, and location of the meeting.
  • The employee’s right to be accompanied by a work colleague or trade union representative.
  • The potential outcomes (e.g., verbal warning, written warning, final warning, or dismissal).
• Impartial Panel: Arrange for an impartial manager to chair the meeting (ideally, one who was not involved in the initial investigation) and a separate person to take detailed notes.
• Set the Scene: Ensure the meeting is held in a private, neutral, and comfortable room to minimise disruption and maintain confidentiality.

2. Conducting the Interview

• Opening the Meeting: Introduce all attendees and clarify their roles (Chair, Note-Taker, Employee, Companion). State the purpose of the meeting—to discuss the allegations and give the employee a chance to respond. Reiterate that no decision has been made yet.
• Present the Case: The Chair should clearly present the specific allegations, along with the evidence gathered during the investigation, including dates, times, and impact on the business.
• Employee’s Response: Give the employee a full and uninterrupted opportunity to respond to each allegation.
  • Ask Open Questions: Use clear, non-leading questions to seek clarification and understand the employee’s perspective.
  • Listen Actively: Pay close attention to their explanations, any evidence they present, and any mitigating factors (e.g., health issues, personal problems) they raise.
  • Engage with the Companion: The employee’s companion can confer with the employee, sum up their case, or present their point of view, but they cannot answer questions on the employee’s behalf.
• Adjournment: Announce a short adjournment to review the information or discuss any new points that have been raised. If significant new evidence emerges, you may need to adjourn the entire interview to conduct further investigation.
• Closing the Meeting: Summarise the key points discussed and explain the next steps (i.e., that the panel will now consider all the evidence before communicating a decision). Advise the employee on when and how they will receive the outcome.

3. Post-Interview Follow-Up and Conclusion

• Decision-Making: The management team must carefully and impartially consider all the evidence presented—both from the investigation and the employee’s response—against the company’s disciplinary policy. The outcome must be reasonable and proportionate to the offense.
• Communicating the Decision: Inform the employee of the final decision in writing without undue delay. This letter must include:
  • The outcome of the disciplinary process.
  • The reasons for the decision.
  • Any disciplinary action taken (e.g., type of warning, required improvements, and a review period).
  • The employee’s right to appeal the decision and the process for doing so.
• Documentation: Maintain meticulous records of the entire process, including the investigation report, the invitation letter, the meeting notes, and the outcome letter.

Real-Life Business Example

A major international Financial Services company with a global presence faced a disciplinary matter involving a senior IT Manager in their London office.

• The Issue: The manager was found to have circumvented established IT procurement procedures to award a contract to a company owned by a personal acquaintance, resulting in a conflict of interest and potential financial loss.
• The Process:
  1. Investigation: An independent Internal Audit team conducted a forensic investigation, gathering emails, financial records, and interviewing the procurement team.
  2. Invitation: The manager was formally invited to a disciplinary hearing, detailing the specific policy breaches and evidence.
  3. Interview: The interview was chaired by the Head of HR, with a separate legal representative taking notes. The manager attended with a trade union representative. During the interview, the manager did not deny the procedure breach but cited an urgency to deliver a project as a mitigating factor, arguing the company acquaintance was the only one who could meet the deadline.
  4. Decision: After considering the evidence, the panel acknowledged the manager’s good performance history and the mitigating factor of project urgency, but concluded that the breach of the conflict of interest policy was severe.
  5. Outcome: The manager was issued a Final Written Warning for gross misconduct, which was accompanied by a mandatory ethics training and a permanent removal of procurement responsibilities. The decision was not immediate dismissal, which balanced accountability with retaining a skilled employee, provided the breach was not repeated.

Conclusion: The Financial Services company demonstrated fairness by conducting a thorough investigation, allowing the employee representation, and considering mitigating factors during the interview. By issuing a final written warning with clear, performance-related sanctions instead of immediate dismissal, they upheld the integrity of their policy while providing a chance for rehabilitation, a vital conclusion in disciplinary matters.