Context
POL00448308
POL00448308
CONFIDENTIAL
@
TERMS OF REFERENCE
PAST ROLES PROJECT
After the Inquiry Compensation Hearing in December 2022, it became apparent that POL had recruited
into its Remediation Unite team (RU Team) employees who had previously worked for POL in the
auditing, investigation, suspension, or termination of Postmasters connected to historic horizon shortfall
cases. This risked undermining the integrity of, or the public or postmaster confidence in, the work being
done by RU. It also put employees “at risk”. RU took a “conflicts paper” to GE on 7 July 2023 and a further
paper on 8 November 2023 “past roles paper” recommending work to identify RU employees with
potentially problematic historical roles with a view to redeploying them and extending this thinking into the
wider business.
Aim
The aim of this project is to:
1.
Scope:
Review the past roles conducted by colleagues currently employed within the RU and
Inquiry teams, to identify any that could be (for want of a better word) potentially
problematic. Examples of such roles might include roles in the auditing, investigation,
suspension or termination of Postmasters connected to historic horizon shortfall cases.
They might be “problematic” because they pose a risk to integrity of independence of work
being done now, public or postmaster confidence in that work, they create conflict, or they
place our employees at risk.
Identify where else in the business (other than RU and Inquiry) such roles might also pose
a similar risk.
Identify the employees who have those potentially problematic backgrounds and who are
working in roles in which that creates an identified risk.
Mitigate the risks, including by internal and external comms, provided employee with
appropriate support (including EAP support), training and education, and exploring
redeployment.
To achieve the Aim the people team will produce MI and a report that details the past employment history
of colleagues currently employed in RU, and Inquiry team and elsewhere in the business.
Paying particular attention to:
Problematic past roles
Roles that were involved in the auditing, investigation, suspension or termination of
Postmaster’s and POL employees.
Problematic roles as identified between January 1999 and December 2017 (the period of
prosecution undertaken by Post Office Ltd).
Reemployment of colleague's post 2017 who have potential problematic backgrounds
between January 1999 and December 2017.
The information obtained during one-to-one meetings with their line managers to clarify the
roles and accountabilities of the colleagues’ previous roles.
1
CONFIDENTIAL
POL00448308
POL00448308
CONFIDENTIAL
The roles in the wider business in which particular risk could result.
= Performing an initial assessment of the roles currently undertaken within POL at large in
respect of which having worked in such a role could be thought to give rise to the identified
risks.
The ks that could emerge
= For example: (i) Criticism of employees (say on social media); (ii) Undermining the integrity
of the work being performed (for example, giving rise to conflict or the perception of
conflict); (iii) Undermining postmaster of the public confidence in the work being performed
by POL, or the specific team.
Next Step Options
The below list of next steps is likely to form the most likely recommendations made by the People Team to
the past roles review panel. Neither the People Team or the review panel is limited to the contents of this
option list and may choose to direct next steps outside of, or in addition to, the options below.
« Convene a “Past Roles Panel” to:
"First: Review the rationale applied to the assessments, in particular:
= Whether the past problematic roles are correct
= Whether the role in the wider business in which particular risk could result are
correct
= Whether the risks identified are correct
=" [Approve any associated internal and external comms]
=" Second: having established and approved the rationale, to hear individual cases to
decide whether colleagues should carry on performing their current roles or whether
an ER process should be commenced to redeploy.
* All colleagues must be assessed on a case-by-case basis to ensure the consistent
and fair treatment of impacted individuals.
= Panel should direct that further clarity on the colleagues past employment history
and detail of roles undertaken where there is some element of ambiguity about the
risk.
* If the panel agrees the colleagues past role gives rise to an identified risk, the panel
should decide on the correct approach, which could include:
e EAP support.
¢ Training and education (for teams or individuals).
e Redeployment into an alternative role.
= The panel should look to resolve individual cases through support, training and
cultural shift, and leaving colleagues in existing roles before looking to redeploy.
= If the panel considers redeployment is preferable, it shall have regard to colleague
expectations, adaptability clauses in employment contracts, the suitability of suitable
alternative employment and its suitability for the particular colleague.
= The panel should also have regard to the operational impact of unsettling or
displacing colleagues in relevant parts of the business unit (single points of failure)
and agree actions to mitigate.
CONFIDENTIAL
POL00448308
POL00448308
CONFIDENTIAL
Signed:
CONFIDENTIAL