Disciplinary explained

Line managers should act promptly to deal with any misconduct on the part of their employees. Failure to communicate to an employee that something that he or she has done is unacceptable may lead the employee to assume that his or her conduct is satisfactory. This could make it much more difficult for the manager to deal effectively with the problem behaviour and allow issues to escalate.

In the first instance it may be most appropriate to confront unsatisfactory behaviour informally and try to assist the employee to improve. This can be achieved by inviting the employee to an informal discussion, as soon as the problem arises, to explain concerns, expectations and actions going forward. Dealing with an issue promptly can prevent the problem escalating and therefore it is always advisable to have the discussion at the earliest possible opportunity. The meeting should be followed up in writing and be clear that further unacceptable behaviour could lead to formal action under the disciplinary procedures.

If informal action has not resulted in the required improvement or if the misconduct is considered to have breached the University of Southampton standards, it may be appropriate to take formal action under the disciplinary procedure (see the Employee Relations toolkit for more information).

Depending on the situation, it may be necessary to suspend an employee with pay for a short period of time, pending the outcome of a preliminary investigation and any subsequent disciplinary hearing. A decision to suspend is usually taken as a precautionary measure where it is considered to be in the best interest of the University, students or staff.

It is important that the employee is informed that the suspension is not a disciplinary sanction and does not imply prejudgement of guilt. It may be appropriate to consider suspension for the safety of the individual under investigation or the safety of other staff or students, to prevent the individual under investigation being influenced or influencing others and to prevent possible interference with evidence.

Alternatives to suspension can be considered such as a short-term redeployment or working away from the office, however instructions should be clear regarding any restrictions placed on them.

In the first instance you must consult with your HR representative before suspending any member of staff to discuss whether suspension is appropriate and to gain the relevant authorisation.

Where there is a concern raised about an employee or by an employee under either of the University's disciplinary procedure or grievance procedure, it is important to conduct a fair and reasonable investigation in to the matter. The purpose of the investigation is to establish the facts or evidence related to the matter(s) alleged.

An appropriate investigator will be appointed to ensure a fair and reasonable investigation is undertaken. The investigator will be impartial and have had no prior involvement in the issue to be investigated.

For further guidance we recommend you speak with HR and consult the Employee Relations toolkit.

If a member of staff's conduct does not meet the required standards, the manager should try to help that employee to improve.

This may be achieved through an informal discussion with the employee as soon as problems arise, to explain the concerns and to agree actions for going forward.

Dealing with issues in this way can often prevent the issue escalating, so it is always advisable to try to resolve the issue at the earliest opportunity. It may be helpful to follow up the discussion in writing.

When having this type of discussion it may be useful to consider the following:

• What is the issue and are there any contributing factors or causes?
• Where improvement is required, have you explored the way forward?
• Does the employee understand what is required of them?
• Has a clear timescale for improvement been set?
• Have the implications of failing to maintain these standards been explained?

If informal action has not resulted in an acceptable standard of conduct, or if a member of staff is considered to have breached the University’s standards of conduct, it may be appropriate to take formal action under this procedure.

It is hoped that the informal management of conduct issues will produce the necessary improvements and avoid the use of formal procedures.

However, the use of informal measures as a precursor to formal procedures is not always appropriate. For the avoidance of doubt, in order to start formal proceedings, it is not necessary to precede this by informal action.

Disciplinary action will not be taken against a member of staff until there has been a full and fair preliminary investigation to determine the facts of the matter and to establish if further action is necessary.

The conduct being investigated should normally have occurred or come to light in the preceding six months.

The person who starts the disciplinary proceedings is the initiator.

The initiator is normally the next level manager of the line manager of the person facing allegations.

The initiator requests that a preliminary investigation is carried out and appoints an investigating officer. On completion of the investigation report, the initiator will determine what action, if any, is appropriate.

For staff at levels 1 to 3:

A first level warning will be retained on file and will be regarded as spent between six months and one year subject to satisfactory conduct and/or performance.

A second level warning will be retained on file and will be regarded as spent between one year and two years subject to satisfactory conduct and/or performance.

For staff at levels 4 and above:

A first level warning will retained on file and will be regarded as spent after one year subject to satisfactory conduct and/or performance.

A second level warning will be retained on file and will be regarded as spent after two years subject to satisfactory conduct and/or performance.

In all cases, once the warning is spent it will remain on the member of staff’s file for other relevant employment purposes.

If a member of staff has a live warning on file, this may be considered when deciding on an appropriate sanction at the second disciplinary hearing.

For instance, if a first level warning is live and further misconduct occurs then it may be appropriate to issue a second level warning.

If the grievance raises issues which are the subject of the disciplinary process, the grievance should be raised as part of the disciplinary procedure.

If the grievance concerns the conduct of the investigation the matter should be raised with the person instituting the procedure.

If a member of staff becomes unwell during the course of a disciplinary procedure, the member of staff should normally be referred to Occupational Health.

This should be discussed with the member of staff and their consent obtained.

An employee may become anxious and stressed in the run-up to a disciplinary hearing and it is therefore important to establish from Occupational Health whether the employee is fit to attend a disciplinary hearing, even if signed off sick.

It is normally recommended by occupational health that it is in the interests of the member of staff’s wellbeing for the hearing to proceed as this removes the anxiety and stress.

The University has an Occupational Health Service and members of staff who are unwell can access this service either by a referral from their manager or they can self refer.

The University Employee Assistance Programme is also available.

Trade Union members may wish to seek support from their union.

Yes. If formal action has been taken and you feel that the decision made at a disciplinary hearing was wrong or unjust, you can appeal.

Write to the Director of HR setting out the grounds of your appeal.

The relevant timescales for taking action are identified in the University’s disciplinary procedure.

For further guidance we recommend you speak to Employee Relations and consult the University's policies and procedures.