Most HR teams use scripts. They keep meetings on track, stop managers from rambling, and prevent someone from opening a disciplinary hearing with: ‘Is there any reason I shouldn’t sack you?’ But can a script go too far and turn a fair process into a predetermined one?
The recent Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) judgment in Alom v Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) answers that question.
What happened?
Mr Alom worked for the FCA and had a difficult history with a colleague, Ms S. After a heated argument in January 2020, Ms S received an anonymous, deeply unpleasant e-mail that evening, containing personal references so specific they could only have been known to her and Mr Alom. The employer concluded that Mr Alom sent it. A second (non-anonymous) e-mail in 2021, disclosed confidential details from a grievance outcome.
HR investigated. The Cyber Security Team examined Mr Alom’s work computer and found nothing linking him to the e-mails. However, they did uncover documents indicating a close, complex relationship. The disciplinary case focused on the two messages.
The dismissing manager used a pre-prepared script drafted by HR. That script included lines such as:
‘I’ve read the e-mail of 23 January – it was one of the most unpleasant e-mails I’ve read’.
FCA dismissed Mr Alom for misconduct and dismissed his appeal. He argued that the dismissal was predetermined, that the process was unfair, and that the script showed the manager had decided the outcome before the hearing even began.
What did the EAT decide and why?
The EAT dismissed the appeal.
The tribunal had been entitled to find that the dismissing manager reached his own view after hearing Mr Alom’s representations. The EAT agreed. While parts of the script were ‘inappropriate’ because they suggested what the manager should think, they were not fatal. What mattered was evidence that the manager engaged with the meeting and the transcripts showed he did.
What can we learn?
Guide, do not decide
Use the script to structure, not conclude. Anything that implies the decision-maker has already made up their mind will cause problems.
Advise, do not direct
HR can guide on the process and law but not on the substance of the decision.
The decision can rescue the investigation
If the employer does not rely on any problematic part of the investigation when dismissing, the dismissal can still be fair.
Source: Mr J Alom v The Financial Conduct Authority: [2025] EAT 138 – GOV.UK
