In my experience, Lawyers make a good support person because they tend to play by the rules. Because a lawyer might also assessing how HR (or the manager) conducts the meeting, you do need to ensure the meeting is well managed. HR should always, in my view, include a support person, at least to take the minutes.

Otherwise you will loose control of the meeting. If the support person needs to stop the meeting go outside tell the employee to ask a question and then restart the meeting, then stop the meeting to tell the employee to ask a clarifying question and so one, there will be too many breaks and it is impossible to keep momentum in the meeting.

Even worse is that the employee doesn’t feel they were able to get their information across or an explanation as to the matter at hand. Some employees may be embarrassed or even feel intimidated and/or are shy and don’t feel comfortable speaking in these situations. In this situation a blanket rule that a support person can not speak will surely lead to more issues down the road.

At the end of the day, treating people with respect in a meeting on both sides is required and that is what we should be aiming for. I find it a bit silly and childish to have a meeting and tell someone in the meeting that they are not to participate and/or ask questions.

If you are unable to simply manage a meeting where you are being asked questions from a support person, as you sure that you have all the right information and that the meeting should proceed?

While ensuring employees have a support person is good practice and, in most instances, preferable, it’s really important to ensure they don’t become an issue. Where a support person repeatedly oversteps the mark, after due clarification and warning, employers are better off ending a meeting early than continuing with it – particularly if it’s becoming unproductive or going off the rails – and reconvene at the next possible opportunity.

Also important to be aware that support person availability (or lack thereof) can sometimes be cited as a tactic to delay or frustrate processes such as investigations. In these instances, it’s essential to be clear about the process you are following and the employee’s rights and expectations, and stick to them. A support person who is unavailable for an unacceptable period of time is the employee’s problem, not the employer’s. Rather than let a process blow out (provided there has been reasonable notice given) ensure the employee is aware that they will need to find an alternate if their preferred support person can’t make key appointments.

You don’t have to recommend one, but you cannot unduly decline the employee the opportunity to have one present.