First Step – Contact Person ⚓︎

According to the Code ‘there may be value in appointing a Contact Person who acts as the first step for anyone enquiring about a possible bullying case’. The appointment of this ‘go to’ person is recommended (by the Code), as their input ‘often helps to resolve matters earlier and more effectively’. That is, the Code explains: ‘the role of the Contact Person generally would be a supportive one: to listen and offer guidance on options in line with company policy and procedures, all on a strictly confidential basis’.

Whilst the essential function of the Support Contact Person is described as ‘supportive listening’ and ‘information provision’, such is the key role they play in the prevention and resolution of bullying/harassment, that the Code warns that the appointed personnel should be ‘carefully selected and trained’. Of course, in smaller organisations, the (Contact Persons) role/service can be provided by an external agency. 

No Investigative Role ⚓︎

It is also noteworthy that the Code enshrines ‘best practice’, by confirming that the Contact Person should have ‘no role in the investigation of any complaints’. That is, it is not – and should never be – the role of the Contact Person to have any involvement whatsoever ‘in the details or right and wrongs of a complaint’. This direction resurfaces in the Code under the (newly introduced) ‘Secondary Informal Process’ (see https://www.legal-island.ie/articles/ire/features/how-to/2021/feb/how-to-bring-your-bullying-and-harassment-policy-into-line-with-the-new-code-of-practice/). Under this secondary route, ‘the employer may nominate a separate person who has had appropriate training and experience and who is familiar with the procedures involved to deal with the complaint on behalf of the organisation’. Notably, the Code reiterates that: ‘this person should not be the Contact Person’, but can be a supervisor/manager or someone in authority within the organisation.

Important Change ⚓︎

The new Code’s specification of the ‘Support Contact Person’s’ role constitutes an important change from that set down in the 2002 Labour (now Workplace) Relations Commission’s Code. That is, the original Code enabled a complainant to seek ‘the assistance of the contact person in raising the issue with the alleged perpetrator(s)’ in a ‘confidential, non-confrontational discussion with a view to resolving the issue in an informal low-key manner’. Under the new Code, this facility does not apply.

Notably, the new Code is in accord with the role (for the ‘Support Contact Person’) as set down in the HSA’s 2007 Code. It advised employers to name a ‘contact person’ to act as the first point of contact ‘who can listen and advise about complaints of bullying at work and explain the procedures in place to resolve it’. This latter Code focused upon the Contact Person’s ‘listening brief’, whilst serving as a ‘reference point’ for the complainant.

Summarising the role’s responsibilities, the HSA’s Code explained that the Contact Person should: ‘provide the complainant with a copy of the policy, outline the routes available and explain the roles of personnel involved but does not get involved in any other way in the complaints procedure and is not an advocate for either party’. The new Code effectively endorses this remit for the role. 

However, the ‘dual role’ (i.e. of information provision and intervention) still stands under the Equality Authority’s (now the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission) 2002 Code in the area of harassment. It specifies that an organisation’s complaints procedure should ‘provide for a competent named person to be available to assist in the resolution of any problems through informal means and to provide information to both employees and non- employees on the procedure and on the policy in general’. Notably, this (harassment) Code is currently under review.

Real Examples ⚓︎

In line with the new Code, under the Central Bank’s ‘Dignity At Work’ policy, the Contact Person is the organisation’s ‘point of first response’ ,should bullying and/or harassment issues arise. Likewise, the Health Service Executive’s (HSE) Contact Persons volunteer and receive training to enable them to provide information and support on the policy to their colleagues. That is, their function is to ‘help the employee to clarify what s/he is experiencing and to empower the employee to decide what course of action, if any, s/he may wish to take’. Notably, their services are also available to ‘any employee against whom a complaint of workplace bullying or harassment has been made’. 

This is identical to the Civil Service Contact Person’s role, which is ‘to explain the various resolution options, the potential supports which are available to individuals, and to explain the role of the various parties involved in the resolution process’. Similarly, the Central Bank’s policy explicitly provides for the Contact Officer to ‘provide detailed information about the requirements for a written complaint’.

Also, in line with the new Code, the Central Bank’s policy clearly explains the objectives of the Contact Officer’s role as: 

• Helping staff and contractors in circumstances where they need information, support, and clarification about the policy;
• Providing the appropriate ‘next step’ information to the staff member/contractor seeking support;
• Helping the staff member/contractor to clarify what they are experiencing and to empower them to decide what course of action, if any, they may wish to take;
• Treating discussions with staff and contractors as completely confidential and not disclosing information to a third party.
• Not dealing with any other forms of workplace grievance or personal problems;
• Not approaching the alleged respondent/complainant on behalf of the person they are supporting; and
• Not acting as an advocate or representative on behalf of the person they are supporting, nor can they direct the person as to the best course of action to take.

Confidentiality ⚓︎

Confidentiality is a crucial consideration in this role. Accordingly, the HSE emphasises that ‘discussions with the Support Contact are highly confidential, non-judgmental and off the record’. The HSE also confirms that ‘the only individual who will know about your visit is the support contact person’.

Elaborating on this confidentiality consideration, their policy guarantees that the ‘Contact Person will treat these discussions as completely confidential and will not be requested to disclose information to a third party’. Related thereto, they are not allowed to ‘retain any notes or records of these discussions’, whilst home or personal mobile phone numbers are not exchanged with persons seeking support. 

However, as in counselling scenarios, the policy does provide an exemption clause, should the Contact Person believe that there is a ‘potential risk to an employee’, whereupon they can ‘contact the Human Resources department so that appropriate professional assistance can be sought’. In a similar vein, the Central Bank explains that should the Contact Officer believe that there is a ‘potential risk to a staff member/contractor’, like ‘a threat to their health and/or safety’, they can contact a member of the Human Resources Advisory team for advice.

Role Restrictions ⚓︎

Directly in line with the new Code and the role’s boundaries, the HSE’s Contact Persons’ ‘will not speak to anyone on your behalf’ and may ‘not act as an advocate or representative on behalf of the person s/he is supporting’. Likewise, they confirm that the Contact Person cannot ‘direct the person as to the best course of action to take’. This accords with the Central Bank’s policy, explaining that it ‘is the decision of the complainant as to which approach to adopt in a situation’, whilst the Contact Person has no role should a matter proceed to the informal resolution stage.

A common quandary experienced by Contact Persons is how to proceed when more than one party to an allegation approaches them seeking support. The HSE sensibly addresses this scenario, stating that a ‘Contact Person may offer support to an employee who feels that s/he is being subjected to bullying/harassment or against whom the complaint of bullying/ harassment has been made but not both’. That is, should the Contact Person be approached by both parties, s/he should support the first person who requests support and refer the second person to another Contact Person.

When and Where to Meet? ⚓︎

On the frequently fraught matter of getting time off to hold the requested meetings, it is notable that the HSE policy explains that ‘prior to taking up the role of Contact Person, the person’s line manager will be made aware of what the role entails to ensure that s/he is fully supportive and facilitates time off for meetings’. It also provides that – having notified the line manager in advance to enable coverage during one’s absence - such meetings should ‘take place during normal working hours when the Contact Person is rostered for duty’.

Turning to the meeting’s venue, the HSE appropriately advises that these ‘meetings should take place in a suitable room where privacy can be assured’. However, in the event that parties cannot convene on the work premises, an alternative venue can be used, albeit ‘under no circumstances should meetings be held where alcohol is served’.

With regard to the level of interaction between the Contact Person and the interviewee(s), the HSE suggests that ‘meetings should generally last no longer than 45 minutes to an hour and no more than 3 to 4 meetings with any one individual should ever be needed’. This is justified on the basis that should meetings exceed this threshold, the Contact Person runs the risk of being ‘drawn into a counselling relationship’.

Common Questions ⚓︎

• To ensure that the Contact Person is adequately prepared for the role and its interactions, it is important that they anticipate some of the more common questions, including:
• Could one’s behaviour be viewed as humiliating, intimidating or threatening?
• Is it possible that the tone or volume of one’s voice and/or body language could be perceived as offensive, humiliating, intimidating or threatening?
• Could one’s communication or management style ever be perceived as offensive, humiliating, intimidating or threatening?
• What if (to reduce stress levels and boost morale) one is complained about for just having the craic (i.e. fun)?
• When feeling angry, stressed or anxious, could one’s feelings be exhibited in a way that others might find offensive, humiliating, intimidating or threatening?
• Could the way in which a manager provides feedback on people’s work, or how s/he monitors their performance, ever be perceived as overly critical or excessive by someone else?
• Has a particular staff member been excluded from essential meetings or not been provided with important information?
• Could targets or deadlines set by management be perceived by others as impossible?
• Having reviewed the policy, could a person’s behaviour be perceived as matching the definitions of bullying, harassment or sexual harassment?
• Is it possible that the (allegedly offensive) behaviour toward the complainant has been repeated?
• Are there records of previous interactions that the interviewee has had with the complainant?
• Was the behaviour that has been perceived as bullying, harassment or sexual harassment be part of the normal disciplinary or performance feedback procedure?
• Where can I get access to this organisation’s ‘Dignity at Work’ policy, to help me understand what is bullying, harassment, and sexual harassment?
• What exactly is/isn’t bullying? Harassment? Sexual harassment?
• What statute law(s) apply to these cases?
• What do we know from bullying\harassment court case precedents?
• Has the new Code and/or the Supreme Court defined bullying? 
• What is the difference between bullying/harassment and the discharge of the   management/supervisory function?
• What relevance has the organisation policy?
• What relevance has the new ‘Code Of Practice’?
• Is there a different Code of Practice dealing with ‘harassment’? Why? What’s in it?
• What are the differences between the new (bullying) Code and the harassment Code?
• What are the procedures and practices associated with making and dealing with complaints of unacceptable behaviour in this organisation?
• What record are you making of this meeting?
• What record are you keeping of this meeting?
• Can I have your mobile tel. number and address?
• What is the ‘informal’ process? What is the ‘secondary informal’ process?
• What is the purpose of a formal investigation?
• How are the investigative interviews conducted?
• Who conducts them?
• What are the ‘Principles of Natural Justice’?
• What’s my right to confidentiality vis-à-vis the principles/rights of natural justice?
• Is there any scope for anonymity in investigations?
• What happens if a complaint is adjudged to be ‘false’ or ‘malicious’? 
• What is the role of mediation?
• What happens to signed statements under a formal investigation?   
• What happens if an investigation encounters a conflict of evidence?
• Has the interviewee discussed the situation and options with anyone else that they trust? Would they benefit from doing so (e.g. with an Employee Assistance Officer?).
• Surely ‘off the job’ incidents don’t count when it comes to bullying/harassment?
• What is the difference between ‘passive/submissive’, ‘aggressive’ and ‘assertive’ modes of behaviour? Would it help if I tried to change from one to another (e.g. submissive to assertive)? How could this be done?

Conclusion – Train the Contact Person ⚓︎

Regardless of one’s role, the bad news is that there really are no winners when it comes to bullying and harassment. The evidence indicates that everybody can suffer if the malpractices are allowed to persist, complaints materialise and investigations proceed.

However, the good news is that the new Code underlines the status and role of the Support Contact Person. It confirms that they can play a crucial role in pre-empting problems, by providing information and clarifications on how to deal effectively with these nightmare scenarios. Of course, for the Contact Person, the trick is to know how to do the job whilst remaining within the role’s boundaries and avoiding mediating, counselling, investigating or adjudicating on issues.

Given the stakes - and the (mainly legal) complexity associated with the role - it’s little wonder that there are a total of 31 references to ‘training’ in the new Code of Practice. It recommends that this training be provided for ‘managers, supervisors and for all staff’ and ‘should identify the factors which contribute to a working environment free of bullying and familiarise participants with their responsibilities under the policy and any problems they are likely to encounter’. The Human Resources/Development function and Contact Persons would also do well to note the Code’s reference to training being ‘especially important for those members of staff responsible for responding to complaints’.