The party is expected to open an investigation after video footage seemed to show the MP for Runcorn and Helsby punching a man to the ground and aiming six more punches at his head. The incident occurred in the town of Frodsham, in Amesbury’s constituency.
Amesbury said in a statement that his behaviour was due to “feeling threatened on the street following an evening with friends”.
“This morning I contacted Cheshire police myself to report what happened during this incident,” he stated.
Employers are not legally responsible for employees’ actions outside of work, explained Bob Cordran, head of employment at law firm Memery Crystal.
Speaking to HR magazine, he said: “MPs are not employees, but employers will of course be concerned if an employee is accused of violent behaviour. Broadly, employers are ‘vicariously liable’ for wrongdoing, which is committed in the course of employment, so they will generally not be responsible for employees’ behaviour outside of work.
“It will often be obvious whether something occurs outside of work – for example, a fight at a football match at the weekend – but there can be situations where it is less clear-cut, for instance, at work social events.”
Read more: Murder suspect unfairly dismissed over reputation risk, tribunal rules
HR might want to take disciplinary action if an employee’s violence impacted on their ability to do their job, Cordran added.
“Even if the employer is not legally responsible, it may still wish to take disciplinary action, for example if the employee’s actions bring into question their suitability for their role or affect relationships with colleagues,” he continued.
“Being charged with, or even convicted, of a criminal offence is usually not enough to justify disciplinary action of itself, so it is important to consider carefully how closely connected the wrongdoing was with the employment relationship, how serious the allegations are and, where disciplinary action is taken, to follow a fair process as normal.”
Tim Kingsbury, associate practitioner at workplace relationships consultant CMP, warned employers to not jump to conclusions when an employee is accused of violence.
“Having a full understanding of what's happened is critical. It's important to avoid snap reactive judgements based on partial information, and to offer support to all who have been involved or affected, although it may well be appropriate for the individual involved to be suspended until the situation has become clearer,” he told HR magazine.
Employees could act violently for a range of issues, Kingsbury added, which employers should be aware of when investigating and supporting employees with violent behaviour.
Read more: UK riots: How can HR support employees amid crisis?
"Sometimes violence may be the result of the employee’s medical issues, or may be due to social and economic pressures,” he noted.
“Where the violence or risk of violence is at the lower end of the spectrum of violent behaviour, and where it is easier for the employee’s behaviour to be contained and managed, there is more scope for employers to offer support and to help the employee to avoid reacting inappropriately.
“Bearing in mind that all human behaviour is predicated upon seeking to have some need met, employers can take steps to seek to support the employee, understand what the causes and triggers of their violence behaviour are, and find routes to have their needs met without resorting to inappropriate or violent behaviour."
Employers who choose to keep employees on after they have behaved violently should ensure they will manage their violence going forward, Kingsbury recommended.
He suggested: "Where there's the risk of further incidents, there needs to be a basis of trust and confidence between employer and employee: the employee who has behaved violently would need to demonstrate clear remorse and an understanding of their own behaviour and the impact it's had, as well as an ability to manage their behaviour appropriately in future, even if that comes through support and/or training."
