FINLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Anu Waaralinna, Jukka Paloheimo, Oskari Lindholm and Elmiira Kutvonen, Roschier
and that all relevant factors are given full considera - tion. 5.2 Internal Regulations As outlined in 5.1 Requirements , the governance of HR investigations is not subject to any particular statute. However, employers may have internal poli - cies that define these terms, in which case employers must comply with them. However, it is not advisable to “lock” oneself into overly-specific procedures in the policy, as they may limit the employer’s options in terms of investigation procedures. Employers should have up-to-date policies in place relating to unwanted behaviour, such as harassment and violence in the workplace, and processes for reporting it. It is equally important that employees are trained regarding the policies and processes. This helps ensure that mat - ters are reported and that early intervention can be effected. 5.3 Burden and Degree of Proof In the event that an employee makes allegations against, for example, a colleague, supervisor or mem - ber of the company’s management, the responsibility for providing evidence to support these claims lies with the person making the allegations. The individu - al leading the internal investigation is responsible for determining and deciding on the degree of proof. The burden of proof differs substantially from that in an employment-related civil litigation on wrongful termi - nation, and there are no binding legal rules regarding it. Allegations are often made in good faith based on the reporter’s subjective experiences. The investigator is responsible for determining what has actually hap - pened and objectively deciding on the appropriate - ness of the actions in question. 6. Conclusion and Outcome of an HR Internal Investigation 6.1 Deciding to End an HR Internal Investigation There are no specific rules or regulations govern - ing when an internal HR investigation should end. Whether or not to proceed with the investigation is at
the investigator’s discretion. The investigator should consider when they have gathered sufficient informa - tion and material to conclude the investigation and address all matters within its scope. The outcome will vary according to the specific circumstances of each case. 6.2 Procedure for Ending an HR Internal Investigation Following the completion of the investigation (which includes interviews, evidence-gathering and the drafting of conclusions), the investigator will inform the employer of their conclusions. The employer will then be responsible for drawing their own conclusions based on the investigation and any recommendations. The employer will then communicate their conclusions to the relevant parties. Employers are responsible for ensuring that all actions, including communication, are carried out. The investigator may assist the employer There are no stipulated regulations regarding the form that the conclusion must take. However, it is standard protocol that the investigator prepares a final report and submits it to the relevant employer representative(s) or client’s representative(s), depend - ing on whether the investigation has been conducted by an external counsel. If the investigation relates to the managing director (ie, the CEO), who is a desig - nated company organ under Finnish law, the board of directors of the company will be informed. The report may be extensive or a simple executive summary, and the client may request a specific type of report from an external counsel. 6.4 Reports with this process. 6.3 Conclusion There are no provisions in place that stipulate the con - tent of written reports. However, it is customary for
such reports to include at least: • a description of the complaint;
• a summary of the events that have been estab- lished through interviews and/or evidence; and • a conclusion, which determines whether the allegation(s) can be substantiated based on the information submitted during the proceedings.
135 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook