A grievance lands in your inbox and it is six pages long, packed with employment law terminology and written more like a letter from a solicitor than something your employee would normally send. There is now a reasonable chance that AI has helped put it together, and it is something I am already seeing in practice.
Employees are using tools such as ChatGPT to help draft grievances, responses and other formal workplace correspondence. In some situations, that can be genuinely useful. Someone who is upset, frustrated or struggling to explain what has happened may find it difficult to organise their thoughts, and AI can help them turn those thoughts into something more structured and easier to communicate.
However, there is another side to it. I have also seen AI generated correspondence that makes a relatively straightforward workplace issue appear far more complicated than it actually is. Sometimes it includes employment law terminology that is not particularly relevant, sometimes it appears to give the employee advice that does not really fit their circumstances, and sometimes the finished letter simply does not make much sense when you look beyond the formal wording.
A long grievance is not necessarily a complicated grievance
The important thing for employers is not to be intimidated by the language or the length of the document. Six pages of legal wording does not automatically mean that you have a highly complex legal dispute on your hands, particularly if AI has been used to expand a relatively simple complaint into something much longer.
The employer still needs to work out what the employee is actually telling them. What happened, who was involved, what does the employee believe was wrong, what outcome are they looking for and what actually needs to be investigated? Those are the important points, regardless of whether they have been explained in two paragraphs or surrounded by several pages of formal language.
The fact that AI may have helped structure or expand the grievance does not change the employer's responsibility to deal with the substance of the complaint fairly. It is the issues underneath the wording that matter, and those are what the employer needs to understand before deciding what should happen next.
AI can sound convincing without necessarily being right
One of the risks employers need to be aware of ishow confident AI generated information can sound. A grievance may contain references to employment law, workplace rights or an employer's responsibilities that appear extremely authoritative, but that does not automatically mean every statement is legally correct or relevant to that particular employee's circumstances.
An employer should never dismiss or take a grievance less seriously simply because they suspect AI has been used to write it. Equally, they should not assume that every legal assertion contained within the document must be accurate simply because it has been expressed confidently.
The sensible approach remains much the same as it has always been. Understand the complaint, establish the facts, investigate what needs investigating and get appropriate advice where necessary. The wording of thegrievance should not distract the employer from identifying and dealing with the actual workplace issue underneath it.
ACAS is looking at AI too
This has become significant enough that ACAS specifically included artificial intelligence in its consultation on a new Disciplinary and Grievance Code of Practice. The consultation asked whether the Code or its accompanying guidance should address the benefits, risks and practical issues arising from the use of AI in disciplinary and grievance processes.
That consultation closed on 23 September 2026 and ACAS is now reviewing the responses, so we do not yet know what the final Code or accompanying guidance will say about AI. However, the fact that AI was specifically included in the consultation shows just how quickly it is becoming part of the way workplace disputes and formal processes are handled.
For employers, this means AI generated grievances are unlikely to be something they can simply treat as an occasional novelty. As these tools become more widely used, managers may increasingly receive formal correspondence that has been drafted, expanded or heavily influenced by AI.
At the same time, ACAS wants fewer problems becoming formal disputes
There is another important aspect to the proposed Code because ACAS is also placing much greater emphasis on early and informal resolution. The draft encourages employers to address concerns about conduct or performance informally where appropriate and similarly encourages workers to raise concerns informally where that makes sense, rather than automatically moving straight into a formal grievance process.
There will always be serious matters that need to enter a formal process immediately, and informal resolution will not be suitable in every situation. However, the overall direction is clearly towards dealingwith workplace concerns earlier, before they have the opportunity to develop into larger and more difficult disputes.
There is a significant financial argument behind that approach as well. ACAS estimates that managing formal disciplinary and grievance procedures costs UK employers around £2.36 billion each year, while the estimated annual cost associated with informal resolution is around £250 million.
That is quite a difference, and it raises an interesting question about the growing number of grievances that may be written with the help of AI. Perhaps the answer is not simply becoming better at dealing with increasingly long and formal AI assisted grievances. It may also involve employers becoming much better at having constructive conversations before somebody feels that their only option is to sit down with ChatGPT and produce a six page formal complaint.
Could trade unions become part of this picture too?
There is another development worth considering because the Employment Rights Act 2025 introduces a new duty for employers to provide workers with a written statement informing them about their right to join a trade union. The current government timetable says that this requirement is due to take effect from 1 January 2027.
If these wider changes result in more employees becoming aware of trade unions or choosing to join one, we may see more people seeking support from representatives when workplace problems arise rather than immediately turning to an AI tool for advice about what they should write.
That could potentially mean employees receive more informed support when dealing with workplace concerns, while employers may also find themselves dealing with representatives more regularly during workplace discussions and formal processes. However that develops, there is one part of workplace conflict that AI does not remove from the equation, and that is the people involved.
AI can draft the letter, but it cannot manage the relationship
This is the part employers need to remember because the hardest part of dealing with a grievance is rarely the document itself. The real challenge is understanding what has happened between the people involved, investigating the circumstances properly, reaching a fair conclusion and deciding what needs to happen next.
AI can help somebody put their thoughts into words, but it cannot sit in a meeting and recognise that an employee is becoming upset or uncomfortable. It does not automatically understand the six months of history that may exist between two colleagues, and it cannot replace the judgement required when assessing conflicting accounts or trying to repair a damaged working relationship.
Those parts of the process still require human judgement, experience, communication and good HR. Employers therefore need to avoid becoming distracted by how polished, formal or legally complicated a grievance appears and instead concentrate on what the employee is actually raising.
If a six page grievance suddenly appears in your inbox and sounds nothing like the employee who sent it, there is no need to panic or become overwhelmed by the language. Read it carefully, identify the genuine concerns underneath the wording, establish what needs to be investigated and make sure the process is handled fairly and consistently.
If you are unsure about what the employee is actually alleging, how serious the issues are or what your next step should be, getting HR support before responding can help prevent an already difficult situation from becoming unnecessarily complicated.
EC Human Resources supports employers with grievances, disciplinary matters, workplace investigations and difficult employee conversations, helping businesses understand the issues, follow a fair process and manage workplace problems appropriately from the outset.