Outstanding/ resolved issues in the procedures review: brief summary (December 6, 2011)
1. Records of interviews, e.g., investigative interviews: After HR had departed from established
practice regarding an employee’s right to review the record of investigative interviews, the
matter was referred to the December 2010 JCC but there is no agreement about what that
meeting decided. The July 2011 JCC referred the matter to the procedures reviews but this
decision was not reflected in the draft minutes of the JCC. Current Status: unresolved.
2. Records of hearings: There is no agreed method for producing hearing records that are fair
and agreed by all parties, and that meet a baseline of professional standards; nor is there
any mechanism for resolving differences about what has been said at a Capability meeting or
Grievance or Disciplinary hearing. Current Status: unresolved.
3. The need for transparency 1: The second procedures review meeting agreed that any
management standards, practices, or precedents that affect the disposition of a case be
divulged to the employee and union representative so that they may know the criteria by
which the case is being decided, and so that these standards, practices and precedents may
be properly examined and challenged. This outcome was not reflected in HR’s summary of
the meeting and no steps have been taken in the agreed process of disclosure. Current
Status: unresolved.
4. The need for transparency 2: UCU asked for an agreement that all material that affects the
disposition of a case should be subjected to normal evidentiary procedures so that it can be
examined, challenged, and tested. Management seemed to agree to this request for
transparency at the second procedures review meeting but the item did not appear in
management’s account of the agreements the review reached. Current Status: unresolved.
5. Uses of Capability Procedure: UCU objected to the use of the Capability Procedure in various
circumstances but there is no agreement about the applicability of the procedure. Current
Status: the discussion has begun but the matter remains unresolved.
6. Further disagreements about the proper application and interpretation of the procedures:
There is no mechanism for resolving differences of interpretation about the applicability and
interpretation of the procedures, or for referring alleged errors by HR representatives to a
neutral party for adjudication. Discussing the matter outside meetings is at best a partial
solution, because there must be a record of any objections so it can form the grounds for
internal appeal or external adjudication. Current Status: unresolved.
7. Conflicts of interest: UCU argued that if a chair of a three-person panel had a conflict of
interest, a vested interest, or previous record of involvement in a case that precluded his or
her chairing the panel, he or she should recuse himself or herself from the panel. Current
Status: unresolved.
8. The “suspension” of a Capability warning or the issuing of a “warning” in the absence of a
statement of the performance shortfall, timescale for improvement, etc: Such outcomes are
a gross deviation from the procedures but management has not repented of them. Current
Status: unresolved.
9. Investigations: there are specific problems in the investigation of cases that remain from the
period before the agreement of the three procedures and which have not been broached.
Current Status: unresolved.
10. Inaccurate minutes: in recent JCC minutes and in management records and actions following
the procedures review, there have been discrepancies between what was agreed and what
management then said or did. This is a matter of grave concern. Current Status: unresolved.