Rolanda: We have a situation where two colleagues have raised a grievance against a manager, alleging bullying behaviour. There is a feeling that it's not that serious that it might lead to dismissal, but they find it strange that the investigating officer interviewed both complainants at the same time and they signed a joint statement.

The person who's asking the question says, "I've never come across this before in almost 30 years of management where witnesses are not interviewed separately. Is this okay?"

Seamus: I think the preference is always that when there are statements taken, they are taken separately. There's a bit of a natural justice element to that as well. If they're taken jointly, one person might have influence over the other. It just wouldn't be as straightforward as having separate statements taken.

I can envisage, certainly, where there might be . . . I mean, if this is a grievance that is being taken, look at the LRA Code of Practice in respect of grievances. The potential is that this could lead on, as we said, to disciplinary action.

I don't think now from the circumstances of what the query relates to that they're looking at dismissal, but even at that, you could imagine the employee that has been accused of actions not being happy if there have been joint statements taken and maybe influence of one employee over the other.

I think, preferably, the best way is always to do it as one separate statement. When you have two people in the same room together, you're really only getting a mixed version of events coming from that.

If it was to be tested, I think the risk for the employer would be that the integrity of the investigation might be slightly compromised by that. It depends on the circumstances.

Certainly, I'm aware of circumstances where there are collective grievances taken, but in my experience of that, they would always follow on with individual, separate statements from each person. You wouldn't bring five people into a room and put a statement together from that. I think it's best that it is separated out.

Rolanda: I suppose the reality is if it went anywhere and it went to tribunal, those people are going to be interviewed separately or questioned separately at tribunal as opposed to jointly.

Seamus: Absolutely.

Rolanda: It's important to bear that in mind.

Seamus: Even from the point of view of the risk for the employer, if the grievance isn't dealt with properly either, the aggrieved parties could then raise an issue and say, "We're not happy with the process that has gone on". So it's very important for the employer just to maintain a straightforward approach here.

It may seem that you could save a bit of time doing a joint statement and things like that, but my advice would certainly be that you adhere to the good principles of interviewing separately and having two separate statements.