![[Basket]](images/basket.png){kind=small}
Your order![[cover image]](images/issue/BK201211.jpg)
If the complaint is upheld
If the complaint is upheld, action to stop the bullying or harassment should be taken immediately. One option is to separate the perpetrator and the target. If relocation is necessary, it should be the bully who is relocated, unless the complainant wishes to move. There have been many incidents where the person who has complained has been moved to another office because they were the more junior member of staff.
Acas says that any action to be taken against the bully or harasser must be reasonable in light of the facts. In some cases counselling or training of the harasser is better than (or can accompany) a disciplinary penalty. That training could include, for example, anger management counselling, or disability awareness training. The procedure should make it clear that disciplinary action is a possible outcome if an employee is found guilty of harassment, and should explain the range of possible sanctions:
An NHS Mental Health Trust offered to deal with disciplinary issues, including allegations of bullying and harassment, against a consultant psychiatrist, Dr Sarkar, using its Fair Blame Policy, which is designed for “fairly low level breaches of conduct or performance standards [which] do not constitute potentially serious or gross offences”. The maximum sanction under the Policy was redeployment to a different part of the Trust and a first written warning. However, the process under the Fair Blame Policy later broke down and Dr Sarkar was suspended. The Trust then added some additional relatively minor allegations to the charges against Dr Sarkar and set up a full disciplinary panel which dismissed him for gross misconduct.
The Court of Appeal concluded that the dismissal was unfair, in part because the Trust had signalled, by offering to deal with the allegations under its Fair Blame Policy, that it regarded the bullying and harassment allegations as minor and only capable of justifying a first written warning. It was not fair, in these circumstances, to dismiss Dr Sarkar for gross misconduct.
Sakar v West London Mental Health NHS Trust [2010] EWCA Civ 289
If the target of the bullying or harassment is required to be a witness in the disciplinary process, it is important that they continue to have union representation.
It is also important that the situation is monitored to check that the harassment is not continuing and that there is no victimisation.