Mead Pusher
I agree that everything you say is lifted straight out of the book. However, this is routinely treated as broad guidelines, not rules, and there are formal written rulings that qualify the following points:
“with a friend present” – Management may initiate interviews/meetings/disciplinary action without the presence of a representative or prior warning that action is being considered. (This applies to both parties i.e. you may be disciplined even though you are the claimant and your case is sound/proven).
“She should also start to keep a written record of events, including date and time, what happened, who else witnessed it, how she felt and what she did (if anything) to try to remedy the situation” – The existence of written evidence or witnesses (and even an admission of the offence by the offender) may be discounted by any investigating officer, who need not even acknowledge the existence of the evidence or admission.
“Investigations should be completed within 30 days where possible” – An investigation is not time constrained. Also, what constitutes an “investigation” is not defined, but the IO is under no obligation to hear or seek evidence. Nor need he explain his ruling.
Information obtained under FOI. You’ll agree it defies natural justice, but that is no grounds for complaint either. (Please don’t shoot me, I’m just the messenger, but the rules allow you to).