--- name: prompt-pack-workplace-investigation-plan-sboghossian title: Workplace Investigation Plan description: Use when an HR, legal, or compliance team needs to design a structured investigation plan for a workplace complaint — harassment, discrimination, misconduct, fraud, or policy violation. Covers investigation scope, witness identification, interview framework, evidence preservation, confidentiality controls, timeline, and reporting chain. Applicable across MENA and international jurisdictions; especially important where labor law mandates procedural fairness in disciplinary proceedings. author: sboghossian author_url: https://github.com/sboghossian/mini-claude-for-legal/tree/main/skills/prompt-pack/prompt-pack-workplace-investigation-plan license: MIT version: 0.1.0 execution_mode: open jurisdiction: general practice: employment language: en --- # Workplace Investigation Plan ## When to use this Use this skill at the outset of a workplace investigation — before any interviews are conducted — to produce a structured plan that will guide the investigation from initiation to report. A written investigation plan serves three functions: (1) it ensures the investigation is thorough and procedurally fair; (2) it documents that the company followed a reasonable process (important if the matter later becomes litigation or regulatory); (3) it allocates responsibility between HR, legal, and management. Typical triggers: - An employee files a formal complaint of harassment, discrimination, bullying, or sexual misconduct - A whistleblower report through the speak-up hotline alleges fraud, corruption, or serious policy violation - Management discovers evidence of suspected theft, data breach, or abuse of authority - A customer or supplier alleges misconduct by a company employee - A regulatory body inquires about a specific incident involving company personnel **Important:** The investigation plan must be completed and approved before the first witness interview. Starting interviews before agreeing on scope and methodology risks bias challenges and evidence contamination. ## Required inputs | Input | Why it matters | Sensible default | |-------|---------------|-----------------| | Nature of the complaint / allegation | Determines scope, investigator qualifications, and applicable policies | Prompt user — provide the complaint text or a summary | | Identity of complainant (or anonymous channel reference) | Shapes confidentiality obligations and right-to-reply procedures | Prompt user | | Identity of respondent(s) (the alleged wrongdoer) | Determines conflict checks for investigator; shapes interim measures | Prompt user | | Jurisdiction / country of employment | Determines procedural requirements and applicable labor law | Prompt user | | Company policies engaged | The investigation must assess conduct against specific policies | Prompt user (Code of Conduct, Harassment Policy, Whistleblower Policy, etc.) | | Seniority / organizational relationship | Affects who can lead the investigation and whether external investigators are required | Prompt user | ## Optional inputs - **Prior complaints or incidents** involving the same individuals (informs scope and pattern analysis) - **Interim measures already taken** (suspension, separation) — affects witness access - **Legal hold requirements** — if the matter has litigation potential, a legal hold must be issued before the plan is finalized - **Regulatory notification obligations** — some sectors require reporting an investigation to regulators (DFSA, FSRA, SCA) even before conclusions are reached - **Union or employee representative involvement** — if applicable in the jurisdiction - **Cross-border dimension** — if the conduct spans multiple countries, document which law applies ## Investigation plan structure The plan should be a written internal document, typically 3–8 pages, signed off by the investigation lead and relevant oversight (General Counsel, CHRO, or Audit Committee depending on seniority of the respondent). --- ### 1. Investigation reference and classification | Field | Content | |---|---| | Case reference | Internal reference number (e.g., INV-2026-001) | | Date opened | | | Nature of complaint | [Harassment / Misconduct / Fraud / Other] | | Complainant | Name / Anonymous (hotline ref: [X]) | | Respondent | Name and title | | Jurisdiction | Country of employment | | Policies potentially breached | List | | Severity classification | [Tier 1: Minor / Tier 2: Serious / Tier 3: Critical] | | Investigator(s) | Name, title, and independence declaration | --- ### 2. Scope of investigation Define: - **What is being investigated:** the specific allegations (quote the complaint or summarize with precision); do not investigate broader matters not covered by the complaint unless new facts emerge - **What is not in scope:** related grievances or historical matters that are not part of this complaint (prevents scope creep) - **Applicable time period:** the date range of the alleged conduct - **Standard of proof:** balance of probabilities (on the evidence, is it more likely than not that the alleged conduct occurred?) — this is the standard in employment investigations across most jurisdictions, not the criminal "beyond reasonable doubt" standard ### 3. Investigator and conflict check - Identify the lead investigator and any assisting investigator - Document why the investigator is independent of both complainant and respondent - If the respondent is a senior executive, consider whether an external independent investigator (law firm, forensic HR specialist) should be appointed to avoid actual or perceived bias - Document that the investigator has completed relevant training (ACAS, CIPDH, or equivalent; HR investigation certification) ### 4. Interim measures Before the investigation begins, consider whether interim measures are required: - **Suspension with pay:** appropriate if the respondent's continued presence could intimidate witnesses or interfere with evidence; must be framed as a neutral administrative step, not a disciplinary measure (this is critical in UAE, KSA, and Lebanon where premature disciplinary characterization affects procedural fairness rights) - **Physical separation:** if suspension is disproportionate, separate workspaces or remote work - **System access restriction:** particularly in fraud or data-related matters - **Communication restrictions:** no contact between respondent and complainant or key witnesses during the investigation *Jurisdiction note:* In UAE (Federal Decree-Law 33/2021 on Labour), suspension with pay during investigation is permissible; indefinite suspension without due process risks a wrongful dismissal claim. KSA Labour Law (Royal Decree M/51/2005) — suspension permitted for investigation purposes. DIFC / ADGM — DIFC Employment Law 2019: employer has broad authority to suspend pending investigation; DIFC Court will scrutinize whether the investigation was genuinely independent. ### 5. Witness list | Witness | Role | Relationship to complaint | Priority | Interview method | |---|---|---|---|---| | Complainant | First-hand account | Complainant | High | In-person / video | | Respondent | Right to respond | Respondent | High | In-person / video | | [Witness 1] | Observer / corroborating | Neutral | Medium | Written questions or video | | [Witness 2] | Character / conduct history | Neutral | Low | Written questions | - List all potential witnesses; rank by relevance - Include any witnesses the respondent identifies as relevant (fairness obligation — respondent must have an opportunity to provide their account and suggest witnesses) - Document why any potential witness has been excluded from the list ### 6. Interview questions framework **Complainant interview questions (adapt to allegations):** - Describe the incident(s) in your own words. When and where did each incident occur? - Who was present at the time? - How did the conduct affect you? - Have you previously reported this conduct? To whom, and what was the response? - Are there any witnesses who can corroborate your account? - Are there any relevant documents, messages, or emails you can provide? - Is there anything else you believe is relevant to this investigation? **Respondent interview questions (adapt to allegations):** - You have been provided with a summary of the allegations. [Read / give summary.] What is your response? - Please describe your recollection of [the specific incident(s)]. - Were there any witnesses present? - Do you have any documents, messages, or emails that support your account? - Is there any reason why the complainant would make a false complaint against you? - Are there any other people you think the investigator should speak to? **Witness interview questions (general):** - What is your professional relationship to [complainant] / [respondent]? - Did you witness any of the following events? [List specific events.] - What did you observe? Describe in your own words. - Did you discuss this with any colleagues? - Have you previously been asked to comment on this matter? ### 7. Evidence preservation Before interviewing any witnesses: - Issue a legal hold notice to IT, HR, and relevant managers: preserve all emails, messages (WhatsApp, Teams, Signal), call logs, access logs, CCTV footage, and physical documents relating to the complainant, respondent, and the period under investigation - Instruct IT to suspend any automatic deletion policies for the covered accounts / time period - Collect and secure physical documents (if applicable) - Document the chain of custody for any evidence collected ### 8. Confidentiality protocol - All parties to the investigation (complainant, respondent, witnesses, investigators) must be instructed to maintain confidentiality - Disclosure limited to those with a need to know - No discussion of the investigation on internal messaging platforms or by email (use encrypted channel or in-person) - Document all persons who received information about the investigation - Address the risk of counter-claims: if the respondent discloses the complaint to colleagues in retaliation, this itself may constitute a policy violation ### 9. Timeline | Milestone | Target date | |---|---| | Plan approved | [Date + 2 business days after complaint received] | | Legal hold issued | [Same day as plan approval] | | Interim measures implemented | [Within 1 business day of plan approval] | | Complainant interview | [Within 5 business days of plan approval] | | Witnesses interviewed | [Within 10 business days of plan approval] | | Respondent interview | [After all other interviews completed; within 15 business days] | | Preliminary findings review | [Within 5 business days of last interview] | | Final report drafted | [Within 10 business days of preliminary findings] | | Findings communicated to parties | [Within 5 business days of report approval] | *Note:* UAE and DIFC labor law do not specify investigation timelines, but unreasonable delay (> 3 months without explanation) can expose the employer to a procedural unfairness claim. EU Whistleblower Directive requires feedback to the reporter within 3 months. ### 10. Reporting chain and escalation - **Day-to-day oversight:** [HR Director / General Counsel] - **Escalation for conflicts of interest or senior executives:** [CEO / Audit Committee Chair] - **Legal privilege:** [Name of outside counsel] advising on the investigation; communications should be clearly marked as protected by legal professional privilege - **Board notification threshold:** if the allegation implicates a C-suite executive, board or audit committee must be notified before interviews commence ## Jurisdictional notes | Jurisdiction | Key consideration | |---|---| | UAE (Federal) | Labour Law FDL 33/2021; disciplinary procedure must be documented; employee must be given opportunity to respond before dismissal; Arabic language for formal notices | | DIFC | DIFC Employment Law 2019; procedural fairness required; DIFC Court will scrutinize investigation quality in unfair dismissal claims | | ADGM | ADGM Employment Regulations 2019 — similar to DIFC | | KSA | Saudi Labour Law (Royal Decree M/51/2005); investigation and disciplinary committee required for terminations; formal notice requirements; Arabic required | | Lebanon | Code of Obligations and Contracts; Labour Law; procedural fairness in employment dismissal; no specific investigation procedure mandated | | Egypt | Egyptian Labour Law 12/2003; investigation required before dismissal for gross misconduct; company must notify Ministry of Manpower in certain cases | | EU | National transpositions of Whistleblower Directive; national employment law varies; employee representatives (works councils) may have consultation rights | | UK | ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures; Employment Tribunals apply ACAS Code in assessing fairness; minimum standards: written notice, investigation, right to be accompanied at hearing | ## Related skills - [[prompt-pack-workplace-investigation-report]] - [[prompt-pack-whistleblower-policy]] - [[prompt-pack-employment-termination-letter]] - [[kb-employment-mena]] - [[heuristic-always-state-jurisdiction-first]]