Direct Answer...Yes. A properly founded workplace grievance can sometimes significantly strengthen your position when negotiating a settlement agreement. This is particularly the case where the grievance identifies potential discrimination, whistleblowing, harassment, contractual breaches or other unlawful treatment.
Even if your grievance is rejected, that does not necessarily mean your case has no value. A grievance investigation that is delayed, biased, incomplete or fails properly to address important evidence may itself become relevant when assessing your employer’s legal and commercial risk.
However, raising a grievance does not automatically entitle you to compensation or a settlement agreement. The strength of your negotiating position depends upon the underlying facts, available evidence and potential legal claims.
A grievance is a formal complaint made by an employee about something that has happened at work.
Grievances can concern matters such as:
A grievance gives your employer an opportunity to investigate the problem and attempt to resolve it.
It also creates a formal record of the concerns you have raised.
That record can become important if the dispute subsequently develops into settlement negotiations or Employment Tribunal proceedings.
Potentially, yes.
Suppose your grievance alleges that you have been subjected to discriminatory treatment and the employer’s investigation accepts some or all of your allegations.
That finding may materially change the negotiating position.
The employer now has its own internal evidence confirming that something went wrong.
Depending upon the circumstances, this may increase the employer’s exposure to:
The employer may therefore decide that resolving the dispute through a settlement agreement is preferable to allowing the employment relationship to deteriorate further.
An upheld grievance does not, however, automatically mean that you have established a legal claim or become entitled to a particular amount of compensation.
The findings need to be considered alongside the relevant employment law.
This can still be important.
Employers sometimes uphold some allegations while rejecting others.
For example, an investigation might conclude that:
but reject an allegation of discrimination.
Those findings should not simply be dismissed because the grievance was only “partially upheld”.
The important question is:
What facts has the employer actually accepted?
Those factual findings can then be considered against your potential legal rights and used when assessing whether settlement negotiations are appropriate.
Yes.
Employees do not necessarily have to wait for their employer to suggest settlement.
A settlement agreement can be proposed by either side.
If the grievance process has demonstrated that the employment relationship has seriously deteriorated, an employee may decide that returning to the previous working arrangements is unrealistic.
It may then be appropriate to explore whether an agreed exit can be negotiated.
This might include:
The objective should be to negotiate a sensible resolution rather than simply demanding compensation because a grievance has succeeded.
A rejected grievance does not necessarily mean that your employer is legally correct.
An internal grievance investigation is not an Employment Tribunal.
The investigating manager’s conclusions do not determine whether you have a legal claim.
The important questions include:
A solicitor can review the grievance outcome and assess the underlying evidence independently.
Potentially.
Sometimes the way an employer handles a grievance creates additional problems rather than resolving the original dispute.
Warning signs may include:
The Acas Code establishes minimum standards of fairness for grievance procedures, and Employment Tribunals take relevant Acas Codes into account.
A flawed process does not automatically create a valuable legal claim. However, it may become an important part of the overall evidence.
Often, yes, particularly where there are identifiable flaws in the investigation or conclusions.
An appeal gives you an opportunity to identify matters such as:
An effective grievance appeal should normally be focused and evidence-based.
It should explain why the original decision was wrong, rather than simply repeating the original grievance.
There may, however, be circumstances where settlement discussions take place before or during the appeal process.
Possibly—but this requires careful legal analysis.
A grievance and a protected whistleblowing disclosure are not the same thing.
A grievance will often concern an employee’s own personal treatment.
Whistleblowing protection applies where a worker makes a qualifying disclosure about specified wrongdoing and reasonably believes the disclosure is in the public interest.
Examples can include information concerning:
A purely personal grievance will not ordinarily qualify merely because the employee describes it as “whistleblowing”. GOV.UK guidance specifically distinguishes personal grievances from whistleblowing unless the particular circumstances engage the public interest.
Whistleblowing can materially alter the legal risk.
Workers who make legally protected disclosures have protection against detrimental treatment, and employees dismissed because of whistleblowing may have an automatically unfair dismissal claim.
This is particularly important in settlement negotiations because the confidentiality protection for pre-termination negotiations under section 111A Employment Rights Act 1996 is not a blanket protection.
Acas expressly states that section 111A does not cover automatically unfair dismissal claims such as whistleblowing, nor does it cover claims such as discrimination, harassment or victimisation.
This can make the chronology particularly important.
For example:
↓
↓
↓
↓
That sequence does not automatically establish whistleblowing retaliation.
But it is something that should be carefully investigated before the employee signs away potential claims.
An employer should not retaliate against an employee simply because they have legitimately raised concerns.
The legal position depends upon what the grievance concerned.
For example, if an employee complains about discrimination and is subsequently subjected to detrimental treatment because they made that complaint, the circumstances may potentially engage the victimisation provisions of the Equality Act 2010.
Similarly, if the grievance contains a legally protected whistleblowing disclosure, subsequent detrimental treatment may potentially engage whistleblowing protection.
This is why events after the grievance can sometimes be just as important as the original complaint.
It is better to think in terms of legal negotiating strength rather than leverage.
A genuine grievance should be raised because there is a workplace problem requiring resolution—not manufactured merely to extract a settlement payment.
However, once a genuine dispute exists, the evidence contained within the grievance process can legitimately be considered when assessing settlement.
Your solicitor may identify:
Those matters can then form part of a reasoned settlement proposal.
A settlement agreement can address considerably more than compensation.
Depending upon the circumstances, negotiations might cover:
An additional payment reflecting the legal and commercial circumstances of the dispute.
Whether notice will be worked, paid in lieu or spent on garden leave.
An agreed reference can be attached to the settlement agreement.
The parties can agree an appropriate date for employment to end.
Outstanding or disputed payments can potentially form part of negotiations.
Existing post-termination restrictions may potentially be varied or removed by agreement.
Appropriate confidentiality terms can be negotiated, subject to legal limitations.
The employer will commonly make a contribution towards the employee’s independent legal advice.
No, not where the disclosure is legally protected.
A confidentiality or “gagging” clause cannot validly prevent a worker from making a protected whistleblowing disclosure.
GOV.UK expressly confirms that confidentiality clauses in employment contracts or settlement agreements are not valid insofar as they attempt to prevent a worker from making a protected disclosure.
This is something your solicitor should check carefully when reviewing confidentiality provisions.
Sarah had worked for her employer for six years.
She raised a grievance alleging repeated inappropriate treatment by her manager and provided emails supporting her allegations.
Following an investigation, the employer upheld several aspects of the grievance.
Sarah felt that trust had broken down and did not wish to return to the same reporting arrangement.
Rather than resigning, she obtained legal advice.
Her solicitor assessed the grievance findings, her employment rights and the employer’s potential legal exposure before opening settlement discussions.
An agreement was eventually reached including:
Sarah left employment under agreed terms rather than resigning without first understanding her legal position.
David complained about treatment following concerns he had raised regarding workplace safety.
His grievance was rejected.
However, the outcome revealed that:
Shortly afterwards, David was placed into a performance management process.
David obtained specialist advice.
His solicitor considered whether the original concerns potentially amounted to protected disclosures, whether the subsequent treatment could be relevant and whether the grievance investigation had properly addressed the evidence.
Settlement negotiations subsequently took place.
The important point was not simply that David’s grievance had failed.
It was the underlying evidence, the nature of his original disclosures, the employer’s investigation and what happened afterwards that informed the legal assessment and negotiating position.
Do not assume that resignation is your only option.
Resigning can have significant legal consequences.
Employees sometimes believe that they must resign immediately in order to preserve a potential constructive dismissal claim. The legal position is considerably more complicated and fact-sensitive.
Before resigning, obtain specialist advice about:
In some cases, negotiating whilst still employed may place the employee in a materially different position from resigning first and attempting to negotiate afterwards.
Can raising a grievance help me get a settlement agreement?
Potentially. A genuine grievance may identify legal and commercial risks that make an agreed settlement attractive to both sides. However, raising a grievance does not automatically entitle you to compensation.
What if my grievance is upheld?
An upheld grievance can strengthen your position, particularly where the findings support facts relevant to potential employment claims. The precise legal effect depends upon what the employer has actually found.
What if my grievance is rejected?
A rejection is not the end of the matter. The outcome, investigation and underlying evidence can be independently reviewed, and you may have a right of appeal.
Can a badly investigated grievance help my case?
Potentially. Failures to investigate evidence, interview witnesses or address allegations may be relevant to the overall dispute, although procedural defects do not automatically create a successful legal claim.
Can my grievance count as whistleblowing?
Possibly. It depends upon what information you disclosed, the type of wrongdoing alleged and whether you reasonably believed the disclosure was in the public interest. A purely personal workplace complaint will not automatically qualify.
Can I propose a settlement agreement myself?
Yes. Settlement agreements can be proposed by employees as well as employers. Acas recognises that either party may initiate settlement discussions.
Should I resign before proposing settlement?
Not necessarily. Obtain legal advice before resigning because resignation may materially affect your employment and negotiating position.
At Settlement Agreement Expert, I advise employees throughout England and Wales who are involved in workplace disputes and are considering whether those disputes could be resolved through a settlement agreement.
I can review:
Where appropriate, I can then advise whether a settlement agreement should be proposed and negotiate directly with your employer on your behalf.
If your grievance has been upheld, rejected or badly handled, do not assume that the grievance outcome is the end of the matter. It may be the point at which you need to assess your wider legal and settlement options.
