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 
What is the warning procedure for?
Page 24
Page 25
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
First, let's be clear what the warning procedure is not for it is not there to prove whether or not you dismissed someone fairly; that is incidental, at best. If a tribunal comes to believe that you gave written warnings just to 'build up' a case to fire someone, then you will probably lose that case.
The purpose of a warning is to try to solve the problem and, at the same time, to reinforce the company's attitude towards that particular breach of conduct. The manager's job is to address the problem and the individual and say, "How can I try to solve this problem with this person, and effectively get my message over?"
That is why a good Discipline Policy allows warnings to come in at a level appropriate to the problem. There is no fixed and constant progression from oral, to written, to final written warning (although that may often be the correct way to handle it).
Suppose you have an employee who has broken the tachograph rules. It was pretty bad, but you have decided that it doesn't quite constitute gross misconduct. However, you do believe that this should be the first, and last, transgression. Then the only way to handle that is to say so; make the point effectively that this will be a first, and final, warning.