• Replies 8 replies
  • Subscribers 6 subscribers
  • Views 1593 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Recording 1-2-1 meetings

Daniel

I've just returned from a very interesting and informative two days at the CIPD conference. One session was around dealing with Bullying and Harassment. We were given a scenario where an employee has accused her boss of sexually-harassing her in a 1-2-1 meeting. We were given options as to how we would deal with it, and a lively discussion ensued. 

The problem is that many of these cases are essentially one person's word against another and it comes down to who we believe. Does anyone record meetings? Would it make sense, and protect both parties if we stipulated that there will be a webcam in all meeting rooms? 

Parents Reply Children
  • in reply to Samantha
    No there wasn't an option to record the meeting, just to conduct an investigation. It got me thinking about how one could carry out an investigation about what actually happened in a room with only two people present. Unless there was actual physical evidence of an assault then I don't see how it could be ascertained if one was actually committed. The manager alleged that the employee took umbrage at the performance targets that he set. You could investigate if these were unreasonable, but ultimately it's a serious accusation which is hard to prove or disprove.

    That #ibelieveher thing is really dangerous I think. The idea that a woman should automatically be believed just because she is a woman is actually rather patronising, but it also hands women a very powerful weapon to use against men. If any female employee can raise a serious allegation against a male manager and automatically be believed then we are heading down a very dangerous road. Hence my (reluctant) suggestions that there should be an openly-disclosed webcam in the room for private meetings.
  • in reply to Daniel
    But the point I think you are missing is you don't need to "prove" beyond reasonable doubt if an assault took place or not. But simply on the evidence you gather form reasonable belief. You can do this far easier than most people think.

    BTW I have sat as a magistrate where often there is CCTV evidence and it is rarely as conclusive as people think. (and its amazing how often the CCTV goes wrong)
  • in reply to Keith
    We've seen in the recent Kavanaugh case in the US that very important decisions can come down to who is the most convincing actor? If there are no witnesses and no physical evidence, then it comes down to 'reasonable belief' but then what do you base that on? I would rather not live in a world where every interaction has to be recorded, but to protect the employee and the manager then I think it's the way we are going.
  • in reply to Daniel
    The Kavanaugh case has little to do with law and everything to do with politics. It mattered little who was the better actor (or even what the "facts" were)and everything with where the balance of power lies in a Congress up for a mid term election. The case also shows that the incidents that give rise to these types of allegations rarely arise in neat interview situations but in other places and at other times.

    Also it shows that sometimes it takes months or years for allegations to arise - meaning that even if you did record it (which would be IMO awful) you would have to keep thousands of hours of material for many years. The data protection implications themselves would be enormous.

    It does little to actually protect either party and everything to fundamentally change and pollute the employer/employee relationship.

    I see absolutely no evidence that it is the way we are going.