The importance of following appropriate disciplinary processes.
As a company specialising in workplace investigations, we are always conscious of the need to follow process in disciplinary matters.
The recent case of Betsy Bassis v NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) has highlighted the importance of conducting proper investigations and not relying on conclusions reached by others.
The case, which concerned the sacking of the former CEO based on conclusions from a CQC well-led review, demonstrates that no matter how confident an employer is that an individual has committed an act of gross misconduct, or made their position untenable, failure to carry out an impartial investigation and disciplinary process will leave it vulnerable to a finding of unfair dismissal. This was the outcome of the employment tribunal brought by Betsy Bassis against NHSBT.
Concerns raised to NHSBT by their Freedom to Speak Up Guardian and the CQC, led to the CQC carrying out a well-led review in the summer of 2022. The outcome of that review concluded that the allegations raised against Ms Bassis were ‘well founded’. The allegations that were raised included:
- Constant criticism of people
- Shouting in meetings
- Suppressing people’s ability to challenge or debate
- Knee jerk reactions to difficult situations
- Making people fearful to raise issues.
NHSBT did not then carry out a disciplinary investigation into the allegations; instead the non-executive directors made a unanimous decision to dismiss Ms Bassis based on the findings of the CQC review. Ultimately this proved costly to the organisation, with the employment tribunal finding against them and awarding Ms Bassis nearly £96,000 in compensation.
Had the organisation decided to follow their own disciplinary procedures, carry out a formal investigation and then subsequently hold a formal disciplinary hearing, it is likely that the ET would not have found against them had that process still led to dismissal. Instead, they were criticised for dismissing Ms Bassis without any process. The existence of the CQC report did not negate the requirement for a formal investigation to be carried out with Ms Bassis or to hold a formal disciplinary hearing where Ms Bassis would have been provided with the opportunity to respond to the allegations. While the CQC report may have constituted evidence supporting the allegations, it did not absolve NHSBT from their obligation to carry out its own investigation.
This case serves as a reminder that there are rarely easy short-cuts in managing allegations of poor behaviours in employment, including for those in the most senior positions. In the long run, taking the quick route can prove costly, not only in the financial sense, but also to management time and the reputation of the organisation.
Author: Kris Bell, Research Associate
