Suggests that coaching should be used to help diffuse grievances before they become a legal issue
Christopher Mordue

Legal eagle

Prevention is better than cure when it comes to grievances – that’s why coaching should be used proactively to reduce the risk of complaints, rather than reactively when the damage has already been done

Bullying and harassment complaints are an occupational hazard for managers, accounting for a substantial proportion of grievances and tribunal claims. Many allegations follow managers invoking formal capability or disciplinary procedures, and it is tempting to see these as cynical attempts to frustrate legitimate management action. While that is undoubtedly a factor, many cases raise genuine issues about managerial styles and practices and the extent to which organisations support their managers in preventing conflict.

In Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust last year, the House of Lords ruled that employees could use the Prevention from Harassment Act (PHA) to challenge harassment at work. Such claims offer key advantages for claimants over more traditional stress, discrimination and constructive dismissal claims. The PHA imposes strict liability – if harassment occurs, the employer is responsible – and compensation for ill-health caused by harassment can be recovered without being foreseeable or preventable. Damages can also be awarded for upset and distress. There is no limit on the size of awards – in a well-publicised case last year, Helen Green was awarded £800,000 in her claim against Deutsche Bank for bullying at work.

Aside from the financial costs, grievances are a drain on management time. Even unfounded allegations have a negative impact on productivity, morale, recruitment and retention.
Few bullying claims involve allegations of abusive or aggressive treatment. More often, claims centre on poor or abrupt communication, weak personal interaction or inconsistent treatment. Sometimes, strained working relationships continue unaddressed for some time before a breaking point is reached. Even where allegations are made in response to capability or disciplinary procedures being invoked, it is common to find a lack of previous management intervention.

Coaching and mentoring are often only deployed reactively in this area, as a remedial measure if a grievance is upheld. Instead, coaching could be used proactively to reduce risk and empower managers. In many firms, managers are appointed for their commercial or technical skills rather than their leadership qualities. Managing staff is a complex role requiring a wide range of interpersonal skills and an ability to adapt your approach to the individual – not necessarily natural or inherent attributes. Coaching can play a key role in developing techniques for dealing with difficult staff or situations, and making effective interventions, as well as awareness of how actions can be perceived or misinterpreted. Coaching feedback may highlight trends and provide early warning of poor managerial styles or bullying traits, while mentoring networks can offer support and advice from those with greater experience.

As in many areas of employment law, prevention is better than cure – once formal grievances are raised, positions polarise around the rights and wrongs of the specific complaint and the damage to working relationships can become irreparable. Equipping managers with the skills to do their job has benefits far beyond reducing the prospect of grievances and claims.

KEY LESSONS

  • Use coaching proactively to develop management skills and strategies for avoiding/ managing conflict.
  • Look for the issues underlying complaints “troublemakers” or “personality clashes” are rarely the full story.
  • Mentoring networks allow managers to access advice and experience when they feel challenged by difficult situations.
  • Don’t ignore the warning signs of high staff turnover or absences.

Christopher Mordue is a partner in the employment group at Pinsent Masons
Tel 0113 294 5194 or email christopher.mordue@pinsentmasons.com