The HR Investigations Podcast

What should HR do when an employee discloses a disability during a disciplinary meeting? In this episode, Natalie Ivey explains how to respond without abandoning legitimate performance management or overlooking the employer's obligations under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Learn how to distinguish performance accountability from accommodation obligations, preserve documentation, protect medical confidentiality, and guide managers through a sensitive employee relations issue. In this episode: Why the timing of a disclosure is not proof of bad faith. When an employee's statement may trigger the accommodation process. How to preserve performance documentation. What medical information an employer may reasonably request. How to balance legitimate conduct standards with reasonable accommodation. Five common mistakes that create unnecessary risk. Key takeaway: A disability disclosure does not automatically erase prior performance concerns, but it must be handled through an appropriate, individualized process. Resources: EEOC, Enforcement Guidance on Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA EEOC, Applying Performance and Conduct Standards to Employees with Disabilities Connect with RPC Human Resources: www.rpchr.com Is your management team prepared to respond appropriately when an employee raises a disability or accommodation issue? Contact RPC Human Resources to discuss practical leadership, compliance, and employee relations training.  

The complainant says one thing. The Subject/Respondent says something completely different. Five witnesses give you five different versions of what happened. Now what? Conflicting accounts are one of the most challenging—and most common—aspects of workplace investigations. In this episode of The HR Investigations Podcast, Natalie Ivey discusses how investigators can evaluate competing versions of events without prematurely deciding who is telling the truth. The goal isn't to determine whose story you like best. It's to determine what the evidence actually supports. In This Episode, We Discuss: Why conflicting testimony does not mean an investigation has failed How to build a timeline to test competing accounts The importance of separating observable facts from interpretations How to evaluate credibility without relying on confidence, personality, or personal impressions Factors investigators should consider when assessing credibility, including consistency, corroboration, motive, and whether a witness acknowledges facts that aren't favorable to them How confirmation bias can influence an investigator's conclusions How to test a respondent's explanation rather than simply accepting or rejecting it The role of emails, text messages, meeting records, chat messages, documents, and other evidence in corroborating—or challenging—witness testimony Why investigators shouldn't overstate what the evidence proves How to handle situations where you cannot determine exactly what was said or what happened Why an investigation may support some aspects of an allegation but not others How to make findings that accurately reflect the evidence rather than forcing the evidence to fit a predetermined conclusion A Key Investigative Principle When accounts conflict, investigators don't necessarily have to determine every detail with absolute certainty. Instead, the investigator should ask: What does the available evidence establish? That may mean finding that a specific statement cannot be substantiated while determining that other conduct did occur. Breaking allegations into separate issues can result in findings that are more accurate, defensible, and useful to the organization. The fundamental principle is simple: Don't make the evidence fit the allegation. Make the finding fit the evidence. For HR & Employee Relations Leaders If your HR or Employee Relations team is responsible for conducting workplace investigations, having a consistent investigative process is critical. RPC Human Resources partners with organizations to provide practical, HRCI- and SHRM-approved workplace investigations training for HR and Employee Relations teams. Training options include: 1-Day Investigations Training — 6 contact hours 2-Day Investigations Training — 12 contact hours Available virtually or on-site for your organization If you have 2026 training budget that needs to be used before year-end, RPC Human Resources still has a limited number of mid-week December dates available. Those dates are expected to fill by the end of October. And if Q4 isn't realistic for your organization, start planning now for 2027. Training programs are typically booked several months in advance, and RPC Human Resources is currently scheduling organizations for February and March 2027. Don't wait until the next investigation exposes a training gap. Think strategically about your team's capabilities, your remaining training budget, and your 2027 priorities. Visit rpchr.com/contact to start a conversation about bringing investigations training to your HR or Employee Relations team. About the Podcast The HR Investigations Podcast provides practical guidance for HR professionals who conduct, manage, or oversee workplace investigations. Hosted by Natalie Ivey, MBA, SPHR, SHRM-SCP, the podcast explores the real-world challenges investigators face—from interviewing and credibility assessments to evidence, documentation, legal considerations, and making defensible findings. The best investigation is the one you don't have to do.  

Politics can be a deeply personal subject—and when political disagreements enter the workplace, conversations can quickly escalate into arguments, accusations of harassment, threats, intimidation, or even potential workplace-violence concerns. For HR professionals and workplace investigators, the challenge isn't determining whose political beliefs are right or wrong. The investigator's job is to determine what happened, what workplace policies and legal protections may apply, and whether the conduct crossed a line that the organization can or should address. In this episode of The HR Investigations Podcast, we examine how to investigate politically charged workplace conflicts while maintaining neutrality, protecting employee rights, and reducing organizational risk. What We'll Cover Political arguments and workplace disruption Threats, intimidation, and workplace-violence concerns Offensive language and protected-class issues Witness interviews and credibility Evidence preservation Protected concerted activity under the National Labor Relations Act Applying workplace policies consistently Avoiding investigator bias Making defensible findings and disciplinary recommendations Don't Investigate the Politics—Investigate the Conduct One of the biggest challenges in politically charged investigations is separating the employee's viewpoint from the employee's conduct. An employee's political beliefs, by themselves, may not be a workplace violation. But the way an employee expresses those beliefs can raise legitimate workplace concerns. Investigators should focus on questions such as: What was actually said? What was actually done? Who initiated the interaction? Who escalated it? Did anyone attempt to end the conversation? Were threats or intimidating statements made? Was there physical contact? Was work disrupted? Did the conduct involve a protected characteristic? What workplace policy applies? The fact that an investigator personally agrees or disagrees with an employee's political position should have no bearing on the investigative findings. Investigate the behavior—not the belief. When Politics Overlaps With Protected Activity Another important consideration is whether the conversation involved protected concerted activity under the National Labor Relations Act. The NLRB recognizes that employees may have legal protection when they act together—or seek to act together—to address workplace issues such as wages, benefits, safety, scheduling, and other terms and conditions of employment. That means an investigator should not automatically assume that a heated workplace discussion is simply a "political argument." Ask: Were employees discussing a workplace issue? Were they acting together? Was an employee speaking on behalf of coworkers? Were they bringing a group concern to management? Were they attempting to initiate or prepare for group action? At the same time, protected activity is not a blanket protection for all conduct occurring during a workplace dispute. Serious misconduct, threats, violence, or other circumstances may require separate analysis. The context matters. Threats and Workplace Violence A political argument requires additional attention when an employee alleges threats or intimidation. Investigators should determine exactly what occurred rather than relying on labels such as "threatened," "bullied," or "intimidated." Ask: What exact words were used? Who heard them? Was the statement directed at a specific person? Was physical harm threatened? Was a weapon mentioned or displayed? Was there physical contact? Did the employee attempt to leave or end the interaction? Were there witnesses or electronic communications supporting the allegation? If there is an immediate safety concern, employee safety takes priority over completing the investigation. Appropriate interim measures may need to be considered while the facts are being investigated. Evidence Matters Political disputes often generate electronic evidence, including: Emails Text messages Teams or Slack messages Social media posts Screenshots Photographs Security footage Written complaints Witness statements Investigators should preserve relevant evidence promptly and look at the entire communication or interaction, rather than relying on an isolated sentence or screenshot. Context can make a significant difference in understanding what actually happened. Interviewing the Parties and Witnesses When interviewing the complainant, subject, and witnesses, investigators should use neutral, fact-based questions. Instead of asking: "Did Tom threaten Sarah?"          ask: "Tell me what you observed." Then follow up: What did you hear? What did you see? What happened immediately before the interaction? What happened afterward? What exact words do you remember? Who else was present? Did you observe physical contact? Did either person attempt to end the conversation? The goal is to obtain firsthand facts, not conclusions or assumptions. Consistent Discipline If the investigation substantiates misconduct, the organization should also consider whether comparable employees have been treated consistently. Ask: Have other employees engaged in similar conduct? What policies were applied? What disciplinary action was taken? Are there meaningful differences between the situations? Is there evidence that the employee is being treated differently because of protected activity? Consistency does not necessarily mean identical discipline in every case. The relevant question is whether the organization is applying its policies fairly based on the facts and circumstances of each situation. The Investigator's Checklist Before finalizing a politically charged investigation, ask: ☐ What actually happened? ☐ What evidence supports each version of events? ☐ Did I interview the appropriate witnesses? ☐ Did I preserve relevant evidence? ☐ Did I investigate the complete context? ☐ Could protected-class issues be involved? ☐ Could protected concerted activity be involved? ☐ Are there threats or workplace-violence concerns? ☐ What policy applies? ☐ Have comparable situations been handled consistently? ☐ Can I explain my findings based on the evidence rather than my personal opinion? The Bottom Line When politics turns into a workplace fight, don't investigate the politics. Investigate the conduct. Focus on the facts, understand the context, identify the applicable policies and legal protections, preserve the evidence, interview witnesses objectively, and apply workplace standards consistently. That's how investigators maintain neutrality—and produce findings that are more defensible for both the employee and the organization. Continue Your Professional Development With RPC Human Resources Want to become more confident conducting workplace investigations and handling difficult Employee Relations issues? RPC Human Resources provides practical, real-world training designed to help HR professionals, investigators, managers, and Employee Relations professionals build the skills they need to navigate complex workplace situations. From internal investigations and HR compliance to leadership and Employee Relations, RPC's continuing-education programs focus on what HR professionals need to know—and, more importantly, what they need to know how to do. Ready to sharpen your HR skills? Visit RPCHR.com to explore upcoming programs, dates, continuing-education credits, and registration information. Don't just know HR. Know how to handle it. Visit RPCHR.com and explore our upcoming events and continuing-education programs. About The HR Investigations Podcast The HR Investigations Podcast provides practical insights for HR professionals who conduct, manage, or support workplace investigations. Because when a difficult employee-relations issue lands on your desk, you need more than a policy manual. You need to know how to investigate it. The best investigation is the one you don't have to do. This podcast is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

Topics: Political beliefs vs. protected characteristics Supervisor bias Comparator evidence Investigating promotion decisions Assignment and scheduling disparities Public-sector considerations Why HR should investigate conduct rather than political ideology Investigation checklist: What specific employment action is being challenged? Who made the decision? What reason was given? Is the reason documented? Was it consistently applied? Were similarly situated employees treated differently? Did political beliefs intersect with a protected characteristic? Does state/local law provide additional protection? Did retaliation occur? Legal note for show notes: This episode provides general educational information, not legal advice. Political-affiliation protections vary by jurisdiction and employment sector. Federal EEO statutes enforced by the EEOC generally do not list political affiliation as a protected category.  Resources  Book: How to Conduct Internal Investigations: A Practical Guide for Human Resource Professionals Available now on Amazon This book provides step-by-step guidance, real-world examples, and best practices for conducting defensible workplace investigations. Natalie’s Upcoming Virtual Workshop: September 29-30, 2026 11:00 am – 5:00 pm ET Live, 2-day virtual format REGISTER HERE This hands-on workshop is designed for HR professionals who want practical tools—not theory. We cover intake, planning, interviews, documentation, credibility assessments, and investigation findings, with real-world scenarios throughout. If you’re responsible for handling internal investigations—or advising leaders on discipline and terminations—this is exactly the type of issue we work through in my upcoming two-day virtual investigations workshop, How to Conduct Internal Investigations: A Practical Workshop for HR Professionals, happening September 29-30, 2026, from 11:00 am to 5:00 am Eastern. We focus on real situations and how to investigate them in a way that holds up under scrutiny. Register now to take advantage of early bird bonuses  REGISTER NOW Subscribe & Connect If you found this episode helpful, be sure to subscribe, rate, and share The HR Investigations Podcast with a colleague who handles employee relations or investigations. New episodes drop regularly with practical guidance for HR professionals navigating complex workplace issues.

In this episode: Why Natalie took a two-month break Why investigations remain one of the most important HR risk-management tools The difference between investigating facts and deciding punishment Why conflicting stories require a structured investigation What's coming in the next several episodes Key takeaway: An investigation isn't about deciding who is right before you gather the evidence. It's about determining what happened and whether the evidence supports the allegations. Resources  Book: How to Conduct Internal Investigations: A Practical Guide for Human Resource Professionals Available now on Amazon This book provides step-by-step guidance, real-world examples, and best practices for conducting defensible workplace investigations. Natalie’s Upcoming Virtual Workshop: September 29-30, 2026 11:00 am – 5:00 pm ET Live, 2-day virtual format REGISTER HERE This hands-on workshop is designed for HR professionals who want practical tools—not theory. We cover intake, planning, interviews, documentation, credibility assessments, and investigation findings, with real-world scenarios throughout. If you’re responsible for handling internal investigations—or advising leaders on discipline and terminations—this is exactly the type of issue we work through in my upcoming two-day virtual investigations workshop, How to Conduct Internal Investigations: A Practical Workshop for HR Professionals, happening September 29-30, 2026, from 11:00 am to 5:00 am Eastern. We focus on real situations and how to investigate them in a way that holds up under scrutiny. Register now to take advantage of early bird bonuses  REGISTER NOW Subscribe & Connect If you found this episode helpful, be sure to subscribe, rate, and share The HR Investigations Podcast with a colleague who handles employee relations or investigations. New episodes drop regularly with practical guidance for HR professionals navigating complex workplace issues.