Use of external or independent investigators for internal workplace matters

FOI reference: FOI-2025-3028

You asked

Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I request information on your department's use of external or independent investigators for internal workplace matters involving staff, including grievances, disciplinaries, and bullying/harassment complaints.

Please exclude any investigations carried out by internal HR or line managers, and focus only on cases where an external party was engaged.

For clarity, the financial year runs from 1 April to 31 March.

Please provide details for each individual investigation carried out in:

• 2022/23
• 2023/24
• 2024/25

For each case, please state:

1. Financial year

2. Cost paid to the investigator (£)

3. Number of hours charged (if available)

4. Type of investigator:

• Independent freelancer
• Specialist workplace investigation firm
• Employers' organisation (e.g. ACAS)
• Private solicitor/law firm
• Other (please specify)

We said

Thank you for your request. 

External services for investigation for grievances, disciplinaries, and bullying/harassment complaints are rare.  On occasion due to the complexity or timescales of a case, UKSA will source an external provider.  For investigations commissioned in:  

• 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023 – 0 cases 
• 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024 – 1 case 
• 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025 – 3 cases  

Financial Year 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024:  

• £0 spent on investigator type: Other – another government department 

Financial Year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, the 3 cases were in relation to the same grievance. The investigator explored all three complaints. The investigation service was provided by a law firm through their HR investigation service offer.  

• £40k spent on investigator type: Law firm 

Unfortunately, we are unable to provide the exact number of hours charged by our third-party supplier, as this information would prejudice their commercial interests, by providing an unfair advantage to the supplier’s competitors, as they could use the information to offer the same services for a lower price at tender. As hourly rates are such a significant contributing factor to success at future tender exercises, release of this information would directly and negatively impact the third party’s ability to secure future business. 

Following this, the ONS’s commercial interests would also be prejudiced. Disclosure of commercially prejudicial information about the third parties we work with could make these suppliers and others less willing to work with us in the future. It could also jeopardise our existing commercial relationships, as they are unlikely to want to continue working with us over concerns that we would disclose commercially prejudicial information. 

As such, Section 43(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) is engaged. 

This exemption is subject to a public interest test. Whilst we recognise the desirability of information being freely available, we must acknowledge the importance of maintaining the trust and customer confidence of the companies with whom we work. Damage to this trust would impact our own capability to compete and negotiate in a commercial environment. This would lead to a reduction in the choice of quality services offered and also a reduction in competitive incentive amongst suppliers to offer us a good price. This would be detrimental to the preservation of public funds and the quality of service received by members of the public. Therefore, this hindrance to our capability to compete effectively in a commercial environment would directly and negatively impact the public interest. On balance the public interest falls in favour of withholding this information.