First and foremost the organisation when considering applying any disciplinary procedure must first consider the 5 indicators of fairness of the proposed actions of punishment which each
Consideration must be passed for any employment decision to survive scrutiny of both internal and external assessment.*
· Counseling – Obviously except in the most serious of cases, was the employee both told of a deficiency and given a reasonable chance to correct it?
· Consistency - Are similar disciplinary problems handled similarly and to the same degree?
· Appearance - Do our actions appear to be fair actions when viewed by an outside observer? Do you see the wood despite the trees?
· Rationale – Has the employee been provided with a reason for the decision leading to the punishment and was it the real reason they are being punished?
· Evidence - Can you point to a performance review, written warning, a note in a personnel file, a CCTV camera, or some other evidence (internal or external) that supports allegation? You generally need at least 3 different pieces of independent evidence to establish a fact in court.
Finally after having read a lot of employment tribunal cases the final test is what I call the “self test” are you really being fair? Have you treated the employee as you would want to treated (or as you would want your wife, kids, friends, parents, etc. to be treated), if some past employers had considered this one thing then fewer tribunal cases in number would have fallen in favour of the employee.
Most tribunals are consisted of people like you and me and if tribunal members feel that the plaintiff was treated the same way the they would want to be treated, the tribunal members will be much less likely to find in the employee's favour.
*Internal assessment being work colleagues and collective moral and external the industrial tribunal and public opinion.
So applying the above to the situation of the Environmental Audit the organization must act to apply the consistency rule.
