>
>
> Both I believe. Surely though as in the previous conversation there is an
> exemption on confidential references and therefoer if the statements were
> given on a confidential basis then that person has the right to object to
> their statement being disclosed. I was not aware that all
> statements had to
> be produced at a disciplinary hearing.
>
Looking at this from an HR perspective, but with DP interests, I have a
slightly different question. When an alleged or suspected act of misconduct
has occurred, there is normally an investigation before the decision is
taken to hold a disciplinary hearing. At this stage, the alleged miscreant
may not be aware of the investigation, and the employer may have very good
reasons for wanting him/her to remain unaware, until the investigation is
complete. EG, there are stock shortages; the employer suspects A, B or C,
but wishes to gather evidence to point conclusively at one before launching
formal proceedings. the invetigation may well include taking statements from
others. If the suspect becomes aware of the investigation, or suspects,
does he have the right to demand disclosure of all the evidence that is
being accumulated? is this not equivalent to the Police telling a suspect
he is under suspicion, and allowing him to destroy the evidence or cover his
tracks?!
I agree that it would be very unusual for the suspect not to have the right
of access to all the evidence being used in a disciplinary hearing, but
logic suggests a different situation ought to prevail during the
investigation. Or is the solution to hold the information at that
investigatory stage in a manual file that is not structured in such a way as
to fall within the act?
Richard Burrow
Assistant Director of Human Resources
University of Newcastle
|