1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164 
Warnings: oral or written?
13th February 2003, Page 24
13th February 2003
Page 24
Page 24, 13th February 2003
— Warnings: oral or written?
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Why do we start with oral warnings and then move to written ones in a progressive warning situation? And the answer is not to do with evidence for a tribunal; that is incidental to the warning process. It is about effective communication.
For many situations, speaking with someone will do the trick; the message gets home and the problem is therefore resolved. Making the matter any more formal may, in many cases, be counter-productive.
However, if the employee does not get the message, the employer must try a different way. The object of a written warning is that the member of staff should take more notice if the warning is written down, and can be seen in black and white.