Peter has written an update to this post. Please skip to read here.
On two previous occasions I have taken the liberty of using our "Community" pages to voice some opinions and ideas on subjects which seem to constantly reoccur in these threads and (at the risk of being told off by the site monitors for misusing this facility) can I do so again on the subject of "revelations" made to us "in confidence" when in our professional role?
We all know there is an obligation for employers to have a grievance procedure; a method by which employees (of whatever status) can raise formal complaints against, or concerns about, the employer or their fellow employees. But there seems to be a massive confusion about whether or not this required mechanism is exclusive or inclusive of other concerns or complaints. Over and over again on these threads we read "...but the employee declined to make a formal complaint...." or: ".....they said they wanted it to go no further...." as if these tied hands, feet and thought-processes in unbreakable bonds; both preventing further action and/or passing the soap and towel for our hands to be washed clean of all further obligation, duty or involvement.
Not so.
In our personal lives we may have varied ideas of how far we must respect information given to us "in confidence" by friends, family or associates, or regarding private matters that we become aware of by chance regarding their lives or circumstances, and these parameters can be challenged by the various contexts of these revelations or discoveries. For instance we may consider it right to respect the confidence of a friend who tells us they are having an affair; but we may feel quite differently is we discover they are abusing their children; or we might ignore our best-mate's driving ten miles an hour over the speed limit, but would certainly not ignore his telling us he intended to build a bomb and let it off in a public place!
So we can debate with ourselves long and hard about our personal moralities and social obligations; but we have no such luxury when acting as professionals, or as employees.
As HR Professionals we are bound by several overriding obligations: Employment Law; our Code of Conduct and, by no means least, by the same duties of care, fidelity and obligation as any other Officer of the Company; Manager, or Employee.
All employees owe their employer a duty of fidelity; in essence an obligation to protect the employer's interests. In addition, those of us who accept roles which manage, direct or administer aspects of the employer's duties of care have an obligation to both the employer and those effected by those duties (other employees and ourselves) to diligently pursue them.
....among which are the duties to achieve and maintain a safe and egalitarian workplace in which the "principle of prevention" is exercised to achieve employees' safety (including psychological safety) and overall welfare.
(For anyone not familiar with the "principle of prevention", it essentially means that we constantly ensure that problems don't occur rather than fixing them once they have occurred: That we check the cart before the wheels drop off, not follow the doctrine of: "If it ain't broke don't fix it").
....Or that of: "Sorry, you haven't ticked the right box so there's nothing I can do..... Next please..."!
There are several (obvious) reasons why this should be so with regard to the good of employees, however less obvious but equally (if not more) important is that the failure to act on a potential or emerging problem can also result in severe damage to the employer and their reputation; for instance if they are later faced with a challenge for constructive dismissal or discrimination as a result of their inaction.
Because: "...but they said; '...please don't say anything.....'" is not an arguable defence at law for failing to comply with H&S, Harassment, or Equal Opportunity (etc. etc. etc.) legislation.
So regardless of the route by which we receive information; from formal written application for a grievance resolution, to an anonymous note left on our desk; from an hour long interview with an assaulted employee, to a drunken revelation of on-going sexual harassment mumbled out at the end of the annual Christmas Party; whether accompanied by demands for blood and retribution, or tearful begging "not to tell"....
We hear it; we deal with it.
We have no choice.
The requirement is a double one: Both statutory and contractual; the former possibly also including protected disclosure and the latter fundamental to our contractual obligations to our employer (and again, possibly, the public's interest). Yes, that creates some problems for us, not least telling the employee making the revelation that we have no option but to carry it forward, in a way which supports them and maintains their faith in us (and understanding of our position).
It also confronts us with choosing the right method by which to pursue the matter ourselves, remembering that at this point there may be many alternative causes of the issue and that the alleged perpetrator also has a right to have the matter approached and treated fairly.
....or indeed that the cause may be misunderstanding, mistake, mutual conflict... or less creditable motive.
But making such decisions is what we get paid for; what we (should) train and inform ourselves to do ably, and what we must be prepared to do to fulfill our professional obligations.
So complaint or concern; all complaint or concern; against either employer or colleague(s) lies on a single continuum which we must address, only one end of which is labelled "formal grievance" and the other end of which may be labelled "ignore for now", but at no point is labelled "ignore entirely"; "not our problem" or "box not ticked- no action".
Peter
