Skip to content
Employee Grievance Solicitor London Advice on

Employee Grievance Solicitor London Advice on Managing Workplace Grievances

When an employee raises a grievance, the way you respond can shape your legal risk as much as the complaint itself. A poorly handled process can turn a manageable workplace dispute into an unfair dismissal claim, a discrimination allegation, or something more serious. David gives employers clear, practical advice on getting the process right from the outset, before the matter becomes a tribunal claim.

★★★★★ 5.0 on Google Legal 500 Top-Ranked, 20 years
35 YEARS OF PRACTICE
35 Years
of employment law
10K+ Agreements
personally advised
20 Years Legal 500
top-ranked lawyer
5 Google rating
from clients

WHEN AN EMPLOYEE RAISES A COMPLAINT…

A Mishandled Grievance Can Quickly Become a Tribunal Claim

How you handle a grievance matters as much as what it says. The ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures is not legally binding, but tribunals must take it into account. Where an employer unreasonably fails to follow it, a tribunal can increase any compensation award by up to 25%.

That is the procedural risk. The substantive risk often runs further. A grievance that is ignored or dismissed without proper investigation can become a constructive dismissal claim if the employee resigns in response. A complaint involving a protected characteristic can become a discrimination claim. A complaint that amounts to a protected disclosure can trigger whistleblowing protection, and compensation for successful whistleblowing claims can be uncapped.

David helps employers manage grievances in a way that is fair, properly documented, and defensible. The goal is a process that does not create a bigger problem than the one it was meant to resolve.

David Greenhalgh | Employment Lawyer London
Meet David

Decades of Employment Law Experience, Protecting Employers at Every Stage

David Greenhalgh has advised employers on grievance handling for 35 years. His litigation background means he approaches every case with a clear view of how it would look at tribunal. He also understands how employees and their solicitors use grievance processes tactically, because he has been on that side of the table too.

That is what makes the advice useful. David knows what a well-documented, fairly conducted grievance process looks like. And he knows exactly what a claimant’s solicitor will go looking for when things have gone wrong.

A grievance is not just an HR process. It is potential evidence in a tribunal claim. How you handle it from the first acknowledgement sets the tone for everything that follows.
Recognition Legal 500 Top-Ranked, 20 yrs
Experience 35 years in employment law
Firm Employment Lawyer London
Specialism Grievance handling & employer risk
David Greenhalgh David Greenhalgh Senior Employment Solicitor
WHERE EMPLOYERS GO WRONG

Where employers most often get grievance handling wrong.

These are the procedural failures David most commonly identifies when employers come to him after a grievance has escalated into a claim.

Failing to acknowledge the grievance promptly

Delay at the first stage signals that the complaint is not being taken seriously, and it is exactly the kind of detail that gets highlighted in tribunal proceedings.

Appointing the wrong investigator

The person who is connected to the complaint, or who has already been involved in the issues raised, cannot fairly decide the outcome. Bias in the appointment process is one of the most common procedural failures David sees.

Rushing or skipping the investigation

A fair investigation means speaking to relevant witnesses, gathering documentary evidence, and giving the employee a proper opportunity to respond. Cutting corners leaves the outcome vulnerable to challenge.

Poor written outcomes

A written outcome that does not explain the reasoning, or that fails to address every issue raised, gives the employee grounds to appeal and leaves the employer with a weak foundation to defend if the matter goes further.

Conflating grievance and disciplinary processes

Where a grievance reveals potential misconduct, the two processes need to be kept separate and handled in the right order. Running them together, or using one to shortcut the other, creates procedural unfairness.

Missing the discrimination or whistleblowing angle

A grievance that touches on a protected characteristic or amounts to a protected disclosure carries different legal implications. Missing that means the response is wrong and the risk assessment is wrong.

Ignoring the 25% uplift risk

An unreasonable failure to follow the ACAS Code can result in a tribunal increasing any compensation award by up to 25%. That figure is applied to the award itself, so in high-value discrimination or whistleblowing cases, it matters considerably.

Handling the appeal badly

The appeal is a second chance to get it right and to correct procedural errors from the first stage. Treating it as a formality rathmon aner than a genuine reconsideration is a comd costly mistake.

Case Studies

Recent Grievance Outcomes

Anonymised case studies from David's recent work, with the financial uplift achieved on each.
Case 01 - 2025
Senior Manager, NHS Trust
Situation
Client raised a formal grievance after being passed over for promotion repeatedly. He believed race was a factor. The employer's process was poorly managed and produced an outcome he considered predetermined.
What David did
Advised on the underlying discrimination risk and the procedural failings. Challenged the outcome letter directly and used those failures to negotiate a resolution without tribunal proceedings.
Outcome
Grievance upheld in part, formal apology issued, agreed financial settlement reached, and a clear progression pathway confirmed in writing.
Settlement secured
+£32,000
Case 02 - 2025
Head of Operations, Private Equity Firm
Situation
Client raised a grievance about sustained bullying by a senior partner, including public humiliation and exclusion from key decisions. The employer delayed the process for over three months without explanation.
What David did
Identified the delay as a further detriment. Applied pressure through a formal letter, pushed for an independent investigator, and negotiated an enhanced exit package.
Outcome
Independent investigation agreed, settlement reached on enhanced exit terms, and mutual non-disparagement protection included.
Total settlement
+£58,000
Case 03 - 2024
Finance Director, Regional Logistics Business
Situation
Client was demoted without consultation following a change in ownership. Management framed it as a restructure. He faced a hostile atmosphere and growing pressure to resign.
What David did
Built the grievance around breach of contract and procedural failure. Flagged the reputational exposure to the incoming owners and negotiated a departure reflecting the client's seniority.
Outcome
Agreed exit on director-level terms, PILON paid in full, restrictive covenants removed, and an agreed reference included.
Total uplift secured
+£47,500

Case studies are anonymised to protect client confidentiality. Past outcomes are not a guarantee of future results.

Get advice

Send David your details for a same-day response.

Tell David about the grievance you are dealing with and he will get back to you the same day. Everything you share is confidential.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Name(Required)

No obligation. Your details are used only to respond to your enquiry.

Prefer to talk now?

Speak to David directly.

If a grievance hearing is imminent or the situation is escalating, a call is the fastest way to get a clear steer.

020 3603 2177
Lines open Monday to Friday, 9am – 6pm
  • Confidential same-day review of your situation
How it works

From First Contact to Resolution.

Initial call

David gets clear on the grievance, what stage it has reached, and where the immediate risks sit.

Response within hours

Agreement review

David reviews the complaint, identifies the legal issues and advises on the correct process, including the risks attached to each route.

Same day

Negotiation (if required)

David advises on the investigation, the written outcome, the appeal, and any parallel disciplinary process.

Same-day to 1 week

Sign-off

A defensible outcome that closes the matter down, or clear advice on next steps if the employee escalates to ACAS or tribunal.

Settled
Client reviews

What clients say about working with David.

Verified Google reviews and direct client feedback. Read all reviews →
David was very good and made it very easy for me to understand. My case was handled with professionalism and responding to me on time was excellent. Would definitely recommend his company
★★★★★ Google
Was recommended. Fantastic help and advice, always responded in a timely manner and supported and advised during a difficult time. Thank you!
★★★★★ Google
Outstanding from start to finish. Extremely responsive and dedicated to providing personalised, thoughtful counsel tailored to my needs. David’s approach ensured clarity and a shared understanding throughout. Always candid and forthright, I felt confident I was receiving expert, high-quality, well-considered advice. Highest recommendation!
★★★★★ Google
I have worked with David for many many years and have recommended him to many senior executives needing advice on their settlement agreements. The best employment lawyer in London, I choose him every single time and can't recommend him enough.
★★★★★ Google
Common questions

Grievances, answered.

The questions David is asked most often before clients pick up the phone.

View full FAQ →

Start with your own grievance procedure, which should follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. Acknowledge the complaint promptly in writing. Appoint an impartial investigator with no connection to the issues raised. Conduct a proper investigation, give the employee a chance to attend a hearing and be accompanied, issue a written outcome that addresses every point raised, and offer a right of appeal. How you handle a grievance from the outset determines both whether it resolves internally and how defensible your position is if it does not.