AI-assisted grievances are landing on desks
- HRNews
- 2 days ago
- 2 min read
What is it?
Grievances drafted with AI tools are turning up far more often, and they read differently: longer, more legalistic, citing sections of legislation and case law. This isn't a change in the law. The rules on handling a grievance are exactly the same whether the employee wrote it themselves or used AI. What's changed is the presentation, and the temptation to react to the packaging rather than the substance.
What does it mean for you?
The governing framework is the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. It isn't law in itself, but tribunals must take it into account, and they can adjust compensation by up to 25%, up where an employer has unreasonably failed to follow it, and down where an employee has. That applies regardless of how the grievance was drafted.
So handle it the way you always should. Follow a fair procedure under the Code: investigate promptly, hold a grievance meeting with the employee, reach a reasoned decision, and offer a right of appeal. Judge it on the substance of the complaint, not on how polished or legalistic it looks. Two practical cautions. First, don't get drawn into trying to "detect" AI. The tools are unreliable, and they pull your focus onto where the grievance came from rather than the issues it actually raises. Second, your investigation and notes are likely to be disclosable if the matter reaches a tribunal, so keep them fair, factual and consistent from the very start.
How Lansbury HR can help.
We can support you through grievance handling end to end, keep your process squarely in line with the ACAS Code, and train your managers to deal with these calmly and consistently, staying focused on the merits whatever form the grievance arrives in.
Comments