Grievances and disciplinary processes are among the highest-risk areas for conflicts of interests. HR teams are responsible not only for ensuring fairness but also for ensuring that justice is seen to be done. A failure to identify and manage conflicts can result in successful employment tribunal claims, damaged employee relations, regulatory criticism, and significant reputational harm.
Every disciplinary investigation, grievance or appeal depends on one fundamental principle: impartiality.
Employees must have confidence that decisions are based solely on the evidence. If those involved have actual or potential conflicts of interests, even well-founded decisions can be challenged as unfair or biased.
For HR professionals, identifying and managing these conflicts is therefore a critical part of ensuring procedural fairness.
Why Conflicts of Interests Matter in Employee Relations
Employment law does not simply require employers to reach the correct decision. It also expects organisations to follow a fair process (you can see more details in ACAS’s guide here).
A disciplinary sanction imposed by someone with a personal interest in the outcome may appear unfair regardless of whether the employee committed misconduct. We go into more detail on perceived conflicts of interests and why they matter here.
Similarly, a grievance investigation may lose credibility if the investigator has a close working relationship with the person complained about.
The objective is therefore twofold:
- to ensure decisions are impartial; and
- ensure employees can see they are impartial
Where Conflicts of Interests Can Arise
The Investigating Manager
The investigating officer should be independent wherever possible.
Potential conflicts of interests include:
- If they are the subject of a grievance themselves.
- They witnessed the incident.
- In the past they have previously managed the employee.
- They have expressed opinions about the case.
- There is a close friendship or family relationship with one of the parties.
- They previously investigated related allegations.
Even where the manager believes they can remain objective, others may reasonably question their impartiality.
The Decision Maker
The manager making the disciplinary decision should also be free from conflicts.
Examples include:
- They have already decided the employee is guilty.
- They have been involved in earlier stages of the investigation.
- Their own conduct may come under scrutiny depending on the outcome.
- They have personal relationships with witnesses or complainants.
- They have organisational pressures that could influence the decision.
HR Professionals
HR is often assumed to be neutral.
However, HR professionals can also experience conflicts.
Examples include:
- Advising a manager they have a close working relationship with.
- Previously handling complaints involving one of the parties.
- Being personally involved in attempts to resolve earlier disputes.
- Having responsibility for decisions now under challenge.
HR should continually consider whether another adviser would provide greater independence.
Appeal Managers
Appeals should be genuinely independent.
An appeal should not simply review the previous decision.
The appeal manager should ideally:
- have had no previous involvement in the original process
- be sufficiently senior
- be able to review the evidence objectively
Questions HR Should Ask at the Start of Every Case
Before appointing investigators or hearing managers, HR should ask:
- Does anyone involved know the employee personally?
- Has anyone previously investigated or managed this issue?
- Is anyone likely to benefit from the outcome?
- Could anyone reasonably be perceived as biased?
- Are there reporting line relationships that could affect independence?
- Would an external observer consider this process fair?
These questions should become part of the case allocation process.
Actual Versus Potential Conflicts
HR should distinguish between actual and potential conflicts.
Actual conflict
An investigator is a witness to the alleged misconduct.
This individual should normally not investigate because they may have formed their own opinion in advance, or at least be thought to have done by people involved..
Potential conflict
A manager has recently become engaged to the complainant’s sister.
While they may believe they can remain objective, the relationship creates a potential conflict that should be very carefully considered.
The perception of impartiality remains important, and people could use perceived unfairness to take further action against an employer, arguing they were not treated fairly.
- you can read more about actual and potential conflicts of interests here.
Managing Identified Conflicts of Interests
Not every conflict requires removal from the process. Management should be proportionate, and justifiable in the light of any conflicts of interests identified. Possible actions include:
- appointing a different investigator
- allocating another hearing manager
- obtaining external HR support
- introducing independent oversight
- increasing documentation of decision-making
- obtaining legal advice where necessary
The decision on how to manage the conflict of interests, and what it was based on, should always be recorded.
Recording the Decision
Whenever a conflict is identified, HR should document:
- the interest declared
- the potential impact
- the assessment undertaken
- the management decision
- who approved it
- why the decision was considered appropriate
This creates an audit trail should the process later be challenged.
Special Attention for Senior Employees
Conflicts become more difficult where grievances or disciplinary matters involve:
- Board members
- Chief executives
- Executive directors
- Charity trustees
- Senior leadership teams
In these cases organisations should consider:
- independent investigators
- external HR consultants
- external legal advisers
- Board oversight
- Audit or Governance Committee involvement
When External Investigators May Be Appropriate
External investigators can help where:
- relationships within the organisation are particularly close
- allegations concern senior leaders
- there has already been significant media attention
- employees have little confidence in internal processes
- independence is likely to be questioned
Their involvement often strengthens confidence in the outcome.
The Importance of Confidentiality
Conflicts can also arise if individuals have inappropriate access to information.
HR should ensure:
- information is shared strictly on a need-to-know basis
- investigators avoid informal discussions
- records remain secure
- confidentiality is maintained throughout
This protects both the integrity of the investigation and the individuals involved.
Building Good Practice
HR teams should embed conflict checks into every employee relations case by:
- including conflict of interest declarations on investigation appointment forms
- maintaining investigator pools across departments
- training managers to recognise conflicts
- reviewing investigator independence before appointments
- documenting all management decisions
- periodically auditing grievance and disciplinary files
These simple measures significantly improve procedural fairness.
Key Questions HR Leaders Should Ask
HR Directors and Heads of People should periodically ask:
- Do our grievance and disciplinary procedures require conflict checks?
- Do investigators formally declare interests before appointments?
- How often do we reallocate cases because of conflicts?
- Are managers trained to recognise conflicts?
- Do we monitor tribunal outcomes for allegations of bias?
- Are we confident an external observer would regard our processes as fair?
Conclusion
Conflicts of interests are not confined to procurement, finance, or boardrooms. They arise regularly in employee relations, often in subtle ways that are easy to overlook.
For HR professionals, identifying these conflicts is not simply a governance exercise—it is essential to delivering fair, impartial, and legally defensible grievance and disciplinary procedures.
By identifying actual and potential conflicts early, documenting management decisions, and ensuring independence throughout the process, HR teams can protect employees, strengthen organisational trust, and significantly reduce legal and reputational risk.