Not a pleasant position to be in. If I were in your position I think it would be the word grievance which I would find the most difficult to take as you reviewed the evidence and gave your professional opinion.Grievance tends to be used to make accusations about inappropriate behaviour in the workplace - eg bullying and harassment. Change that term from "grievance" to "challenge" and that may put it into perspective. They have a right to challenge -but their challenge may not be supported. HR have to give them the opportunity to air that challenge so they are just following due process. It looks as though you did all you could to ensure that the employee understood what your response to management was going to be. It reads as though the employee doesn't like what you have told Management - it doesn't mean that what you told them was inaccurate.

The supporting evidence is going to be the tricky part as you would need to have the employee's consent to release that. I would go back to your records and make notes of the info on which you based your reports to management. Eg:

9/9/13 - initial appointment - ascertained the history confirmed the employee had been suspended from normal duties since ../../13 Anything of note - ie the implications of his health problem for the work place - the diagnosis does not have to be revealed to do this.

16/9/13 - follow up appointment - identify what you covered eg how their health condition could have impacted on his H&S in the workplace. Don't include anything else which could be considered a breach of confidentiality

31/10/13 Mr X attended with his union rep and representative of Remploy. Include what areas were covered in that consultation, the recommendations made to Mgt and the evidence on which these were based. How you ascertained that Mr X understood the discussion and that this was confirmed by the Remploy representative.

Don't worry too much about it - could be that his union is using it as a possible final loop hole.

You may want to have a chat with the RCN too - its useful to have a sounding board.

On 11 Nov 2013, at 20:37, christine price <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

HI, I would be grateful for any advice the list can offer.

I work for an in-house OH service; I saw an employee recently for a health update – the employee had been on medial suspension whilst GP refused a Fitnote and OH (me and OHP) found him unfit to safely undertake his job. Employee insisted union was present ( I explained why I felt this was inappropriate and the employee still wanted them present and Remploy agreed with him). I insisted Remploy were present as the employee has learning difficulties and I wanted to be sure he understood. Consultation went ahead and I then explained my opinion, what my advice to management would be and gained verbal consent to provide a report with a copy provided to employee at the same time. Union were unhappy with my opinion. Remploy confirmed they were confident employee understood. Management/HR then made their decision, which was to remove from medical suspension, place back onto company sick pay and complete the income protection application, which provides a percentage of salary for a period of time, as they felt unable to meet the adjustments of workplace and the income protection also provided retraining for a suitable role. 3 weeks later – the employee raised a grievance against me, which was “I had mis-interpreted what he said”

I am asked to attend investigation later this week and to bring supporting evidence. Given I do not have employee consent to share information, this may prove difficult.

Is it me? how can a grievance be filed for what Is my opinion? What if anything should I be doing here?

Thank you in advance for any advice you can give

******************************** Please remove this footer before replying.

OCC-HEALTH ARCHIVES: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/occ-health.html

CONFERENCES AND STUDY DAYS: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/filearea.cgi?LMGT1=OCC-HEALTH