Ethics & Compliance — Review Queue

Expand screen ↗

Navigation: Intelligence → Ethics & Compliance → Review Queue
Access: restricted to explicitly authorized reviewers; unauthorized users cannot see the area, counts, or existence of items
Primary audience: trained ethics, compliance, HR, legal, or other designated reviewers according to policy

Purpose

Review Queue supports controlled human assessment of possible policy-related signals found in authorized workplace evidence. It presents context, candidate category, policy mapping, and review history without declaring misconduct, guilt, intent, or motive.

Queue scope

The queue can be filtered by assignment, priority, category, age, source, jurisdiction, or policy. Summary counts distinguish all candidates, items requiring human review, items assigned to the signed-in reviewer, and SLA state.

Candidate list

Each entry shows a neutral candidate label—such as possible inappropriate language, harassment, threat, discrimination, conflict of interest, or bribery—plus source, time, review requirement, priority, and assignment. These labels indicate possible policy relevance only.

Review workspace

The selected item displays:

• source and timestamp;
• surrounding conversation or document context;
• speaker or author names only when the reviewer chooses to reveal them and policy permits it;
• highlighted excerpt and unhighlighted surrounding material;
• candidate severity and confidence as separate values;
• relevant policy sections and jurisdiction;
• prior reviewer activity and notes;
• related evidence, duplicate candidates, or existing case link.

Actions

• Reveal identities where authorized and necessary; the access is reason-coded and audited.
• Play or open the evidence in context.
• Add a reviewer note.
• Confirm policy relevance, change category or severity, request more evidence, dismiss the candidate, or identify a duplicate.
• Escalate or create a restricted case when the applicable procedure requires it.
• Reassign within the authorized reviewer pool.

Review procedure

Confirm purpose and jurisdiction, inspect the full relevant context, minimize identity exposure, and review applicable policy. Record a narrow evidence-based decision and rationale. Create a case only when the policy threshold is met; do not use the queue as a disciplinary conclusion.

Safeguards and states

The interface uses human-review-required language. Confidence does not establish wrongdoing. Review notes, identity reveals, exports, decisions, and access are audited. Recusal, conflict-of-interest, legal hold, sealed evidence, and restricted handoff states supersede ordinary queue actions.

Related screens

Cases, Policies, and Reviewer Audit.