Latest Posts
Managing Toxic Behaviour in the Workplace
Toxic employees in the workplace present a unique threat to businesses. Their behaviour pervades team dynamics, undermines the authority of managers, the efficiency of business operations and the wellbeing of fellow employees.
Identifying Common Types of Toxic Behaviour
Three common types of toxic behaviour include:
- The Complainer: This employee looks to find fault in almost every situation, spreads their negative energy amongst the team and dampens team morale.
- The Narcissist: This employee has an inflated sense of self-importance, they are overconfident, lack empathy and never take accountability or responsibility often deflecting from their own underperformance by pointing out other people’s mistakes.
- The Aggravator: This type of employee belittles, humiliates and insults others. They have a tendency to spread misinformation, gaslight and manipulate others. They may exclude people from meetings and projects under the guise of professionalism and their behaviour is often targeted towards a specific or small number of individuals.
The Consequences of Inaction
When managers fail to address such conduct swiftly and visibly, they risk appearing ineffective or inconsistent, further encouraging disruptive behaviour and disempowering those in leadership roles.
The Cultural Impact of Toxicity
Toxic behaviour is also a cultural contaminant as it spreads silently through gossip, cliques, and negativity, derailing strategic priorities. Collaboration between individuals and teams suffers over time, high-performing employees may disengage or exit altogether, leaving a vacuum filled with underperformance.
Preserving Trust and Confidence
In every employment relationship, there is an implied duty of ‘mutual trust and confidence.’ When there is a lack of early management intervention to tackle disruptive behaviour, employees may feel frustration and resentment resulting in disengagement or even resignation (which may itself, give rise to a claim of constructive dismissal).
Health, Wellbeing, and Legal Risks
A failure to tackle toxic behaviour could also amount to co-workers suffering heightened stress and anxiety leading to persistent or long-term sickness absences which could amount to a breach of the duty to provide a safe working environment.
As uncomfortable as it might be, employers must act swiftly to tackle disruptive behaviour remembering to follow the ACAS code of practice, acting consistently and proportionately in each case.
Considering Mental Health and Reasonable Adjustments
Where a mental health condition or disability may be a factor in the employee’s behaviour, reasonable adjustments must be considered. However, persistent inappropriate behaviour may justify formal warnings or dismissal if it undermined organisational harmony.
Why Early Intervention Matters
Toxic behaviour erodes more than morale – it compromises authority, productivity and the retention of valuable employees. Early management of such behaviour is essential to maintain a happy and productive workforce.
This article was published in the July/August 2025 edition of London Business Matters.
Please get in touch with our Employment team via the form below.
Read More
Contemplating Redundancies as a Consequence of the Budget?
This article was published in the January/February 2025 edition of London Business Matters.
The October 2024 Budget has seen businesses forced to weigh up the prospect of increasing employee costs following a rise in national insurance tax and paying higher minimum wages. A survey of recruiters by KPMG and the Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC), reports that vacancies in the market have fallen at their fastest pace in four years. Simultaneously, we have seen an increase in enquiries from employers considering reducing headcount.
Contemplating Redundancies
If your business is contemplating reducing staff, it is important to demonstrate a genuine redundancy situation that meets the legal definition. This is:
- the business is closing or has already closed;
- there is a change in the types or number of roles needed to do certain work; or
- there is a change in location.
Once a genuine redundancy is identified, it is important to ensure that a fair process is followed to avoid a claim for unfair dismissal. Even for those employees who do not have the requisite 2 years’ service to bring such a claim, employers want to avoid any allegation of discrimination where, for example, it is suggested that prejudicial selection criteria was used to select and employee for redundancy.
As a minimum, a fair process requires a ‘genuine and meaningful’ consultation take place with those employees identified as ‘at risk’ to discuss the reasons for the proposed redundancies, the skills and experience needed going forward and the criteria used for selection. The consultation should include ways in which redundancy might be avoided, such as applications from staff to work flexibly on job shares or on reduced hours or, reducing or prohibiting non-contractual overtime. If any alternative options are not viable, then it is important to explain why this is the case. Employers should consider if any ‘suitable alternative work’ is available, engaging and inviting suggestions from the ‘at risk’ employees.
While there is no strict timeframe within which consultations should be carried out (except in redundancies of 20 or more employees which is beyond the scope of this article), these should take place over a sufficient period to demonstrate a fair and meaningful process.
Redundancies are difficult for everyone involved and a fair and transparent process can avoid ambiguity for employees and the potential of legal claims for employers.
To contact our Employment team, please complete the form below.
Read More
The Real Cost of Avoiding Difficult Conversations
This article was published in the May/June 2025 edition of London Business Matters.
In the evolving landscape of Employment Law, one of the most overlooked risk management tools remains having timely, honest and evidence-based conversations. Employers and their managers who shy away from addressing performance issues, interpersonal conflicts, or inappropriate behaviour may find themselves not only presiding over a dysfunctional workplace – but also facing costly employment tribunal claims.
At the heart of many legal disputes lies a missed opportunity: the chance to address an issue when it first emerged. Whether it’s concerns around an employee’s capability, conduct, or fit within a team, early intervention – when handled correctly – can defuse tension, provide clarity, and create a constructive path forward. Crucially, it can also demonstrate that an employer acted reasonably, a central test in many legal claims.
Delaying these conversations, often out of discomfort or fear of confrontation, can send the wrong message. Employees may feel blindsided by sudden disciplinary action or formal procedures, particularly if they were never made aware of concerns informally. This perceived unfairness can become the seed of future grievances, claims of discrimination, or unfair dismissal cases.
From a legal perspective, employers may be able to prove they have a fair reason for any formal legal action however, tribunals will also examine whether the employer followed a fair process, and the employee treated fairly and reasonably. Was there open communication? Was the employee given a chance to improve or respond? Early, documented conversations – rooted in professionalism rather than blame – can become vital evidence that the employer acted appropriately.
So why do managers avoid difficult conversations?
Having practised Law for over 25 years, I’ve supported countless businesses with costly tribunal claims many of which may have been avoided if managers had embraced having those initial difficult conversations.
Below are some of the most common reasons managers avoid difficult conversations:
- Fear of conflict or damaging relationships
- Not knowing where to start after they have let concerns slide
- Lack of time and capacity
- Fear of creating a legal claim
- A culture of blame creating a fear of finger pointing
Training managers in conversation frameworks, emotional intelligence techniques, and a working understanding of employment law principles is essential if they are to feel empowered to manage situations fairly and confidently. It is well worth the investment and may just save your business a costly tribunal claim further down the line.
If you would like to get in touch about our employment law offerings, please contact us via the form below.
Read More