Parish complaint and grievance procedure

Download the original Word document (DOCX, 33 KB)

This procedure applies to all members of the Parish of Bracknell, including PCC members, volunteers, congregation members and those on the electoral roll. It does not cover complaints or grievances of those who are paid employees of the Parish of Bracknell. It is intended to promote reconciliation and forgiveness, in accordance with the teachings of Jesus, particularly as set out in Matthew 18.15-20.

A complaint is a written or verbal expression of dissatisfaction or disquiet about an action, or lack of action by a person acting on behalf of the church, or about the policies and procedures of the church.

A grievance is when a person feels that he or she has been intimidated, demeaned, disrespected or marginalized by the behaviour of another person or persons. It is principally about behaviour, not about differences of opinion, although differences of opinion may lead to conflict.

Complaints and grievances cannot be raised by those who have not experienced or witnessed them at first hand.

Resolving complaints and grievances within a church community comes under the remit of the pastoral care of the congregation and is therefore under the primary over-sight of a member of clergy. Although the emphasis is on reconciliation the clergy will use what limited options they have to sanction persistent unacceptable behaviour.

If a member has a serious complaint or grievance in relation to a member of clergy, or other person directly under the authority of the bishop, then a separate procedure applies if immediate local resolution is not possible.

If the matter involves a possible criminal offence or a safeguarding issue the appropriate authorities must be notified.

In considering whether you want to engage in this process, please read the attached Guidance notes on conflict resolution.

Stages of the complaint or grievance process

Informal: Stage 1

Jesus tells us that if we have a problem with the behaviour of a fellow member of the church we should seek first to tell them face to face and on a one to one basis. Often this helps clear up any misunderstandings and can lead to immediate reconciliation.

However, we appreciate it may not be easy. The accompanying notes may help to suggest ways to approach this that will lessen anxiety and reduce conflict. If you are still anxious or concerned about a one to one conversation then have a look at Stage 2.

What should be avoided is talking about a behaviour issue with others, rather than the person it directly concerns.

Stage 2

If Stage 1 does not lead to a satisfactory conclusion, or if either party feels intimidated or anxious about having an informal one to one conversation, then Stage 2 should be attempted.

This involves approaching a friend or other trusted member of the church and asking them to witness your conversation with the person with whom you have a complaint or grievance.

Following the Guidance notes on conflict resolution may help here (see appendix). If this is not appropriate, or does not lead to a satisfactory outcome, then a formal complaint and grievance meeting should be considered (Stage 3).

Stage 3

This again involves a facilitated or witnessed dialogue. However, it is a formal meeting facilitated by clergy or others with pastoral responsibility in the church. Wherever possible such persons should have some experience and training in conflict resolution and facilitating such conversations.

The aim of the meeting is for each party to hear and understand how the other feels about the situation and to seek an agreement about how to remedy the situation that has arisen.

Before the meeting

Prior to such a meeting each party will be approached by the facilitator(s) to provide written detail of any points of complaint or grievance. This will be shared with the other party. The purpose of this is that there should be no surprise items sprung at any face-to-face meeting.
Both parties should receive detail of any complaint or grievance to be discussed at least 24 hours prior to the meeting.

The meeting

Each individual party may bring a friend or colleague in support to act as an observer. This person is in a supporting role, including an important witnessing role, but is asked not to take a part in the discussion.
The facilitator’s role is to ensure the ground rules are understood and followed throughout. The structure is necessary to create a safe environment in which to express differences.
The outcome of the meeting should be carefully noted or recorded and agreed by all parties so that there is no dispute over what has been said or agreed. A person may be asked to act as recorder or scribe, who is not the facilitator. Such a person plays no other part in the proceedings.
At the face to face meeting each person gets an opportunity to state what they perceive as the issue(s) and how this has made them feel. They are also invited to say what they feel needs to happen in order for the conflict to be resolved and for relationships to be restored.
The other party or parties is encouraged to respond with an acknowledgement that this is how the other perceives and feels about the situation.
Depending on the situation it may be appropriate to have two meetings, as close together as possible, with each party in turn stating their perception of the conflict and proposals for resolution.
The facilitator will seek to draw out and summarise common goals (outcomes both parties would support).
If any conflict resolution steps proposed by either party can be immediately agreed this should be done. Equally either party may want to take some time to think about some or all of the proposals and their response. A follow up meeting should then be scheduled not less than seven days after the first meeting. If new issues have arisen then the process re-sets to step 1.

If either party is unable to agree to any or all of the resolution steps, or if a common narrative cannot be agreed (i.e disputation of facts), or if the conflict is persistent, the process moves to Stage 4,

Stage 4

This will depend on the individual circumstances but could involve:

Deliberation of the matter by clergy and / or PCC and the issue of an instruction to comply with an agreed standard of behaviour or face immediate sanction.

Formal conflict mediation by an outside mediator or some form of binding arbitration (as per the Ministry Division guidelines). Due to the probable cost and duration of such a process it would only be considered where the unity and order of the church is at risk.

In all matters involving clergy and licensed ministers this should proceed via the Clergy Discipline Measure (CDM)

Appendix: Guidance notes on conflict resolution

Conflict resolution

… is for people who are willing to try and resolve their disagreements, and mend broken relationships. It can only work if this is the genuine aim of all parties.

… involves face-to-face dialogue in a supportive context.

… has a definite structure and ground rules are agreed at the outset.

… aims to promote deeper listening and understanding, and to find ways forward that address the concerns of all the parties involved.

GROUND RULES / GENERAL GUIDANCE for conflict resolution meetings

The meeting should begin with prayer for help and guidance from the Holy Spirit towards reconciliation.
A copy of these ground rules to be read out by the facilitator at the start of the meeting and assented to by all present.
Any meeting should be time bound and not last longer than 1.5 hours, with agreed comfort breaks if necessary.
All parties agree to follow the structure and to follow the facilitator’s directions as to process.
No issue can be raised that has not previously been notified.
The meeting is confidential and there should be an agreed statement of any outcome to which all parties adhere in communication with 3rd parties.
If there is a disagreement over the narrative facts (what has happened) then the meeting may not proceed further but instead ways to clarify the facts will be explored / proposed by the facilitator.
All parties should maintain an attitude of attentive listening. Non-verbal signals will be monitored by the facilitator who, if necessary, will draw attention to any non-verbal behaviour that s/he considers inappropriate.
No one should be interrupted whilst speaking. The only exception is that the facilitator has the right to call ’time out’ if the ground rules are not being adhered to.
Abusive or inappropriate language or behaviour, as defined by the facilitator, is not acceptable and will lead to termination of the process either immediately (if judged serious enough) or after a 1st warning by the facilitator.
Each person is asked to take the risk of honesty because truth is the prerequisite of reconciliation.
Careful attention should be given to how one communicates in order to avoid accusatory or blaming language. If the narrative facts (what happened) are agreed upon then each party is simply saying how they feel about it. To this end it is important to speak in the first person (I) rather than second person (you). One should avoid attributing motives, feelings or opinions to another.

Example: You told x what I told you in confidence. How could you betray me like that? You just wanted to humiliate me!

Could instead be expressed as: When x repeated to me what I had told you I felt really hurt and upset and humiliated. I need to know that if I tell someone something in confidence that that confidence won’t be broken.

Each party should seek to express what they see as necessary to be done for the relationship to be restored. Again, this should be expressed in the 1st person: “In order for me to know / feel / do x, I need y to happen”.
Each party must feedback in a way that acknowledges they have heard the concerns and issues of the other. For example: “I have heard what you have said (summarise what has been said). I can see how hurt and upset you feel about it”.
If a party feels they can respond positively to the proposed path of resolution there and then, they should do so, mindful that sometimes re-building trust will take time.
Even if there is no immediate path to resolution, willingness to engage in the process signals a desire to find a way through.
Avoid defensive behaviour i.e. but I had to do X because of Y. The first aim is to hear and try to understand how the other person or persons feels and how they perceive the situation.

1 April 2026 (This policy to be reviewed every three years)