UKGC Misconduct Data Revealed

Article Content

A Freedom of Information (FOI) request has provided a rare glimpse into internal disciplinary matters at the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC). Data covering the period from 2018 to 23 March 2023 reveals that the regulator conducted approximately 20 misconduct investigations into its own employees, with two cases resulting in settlements prior to a potential tribunal.

Why This Matters

The UKGC is responsible for ensuring that gambling in Great Britain is fair, safe, and crime-free. It holds licensed operators to incredibly high standards of conduct and integrity. For consumers to have faith in the industry's regulation, it is crucial that the regulator itself operates with transparency and holds its own staff accountable to the same high standards. This data provides insight into how the Commission handles internal misconduct allegations.

Key Findings from the Data

The response, published by the UKGC, details investigations into both 'misconduct' and 'gross misconduct'. Due to data protection rules designed to prevent the identification of individuals, the Commission often stated numbers as "less than 5", making precise totals difficult to calculate.

Key statistics from the disclosure include:

• Total Investigations: At least 19 investigations were conducted between 2018 and early 2023. Of these, 15 were handled internally, while 4 were commissioned to an external organisation.
• Gross Misconduct: The majority of investigations appeared to be for 'gross misconduct', with a small number (<5) opened each year. Suspensions were only recorded in relation to these more serious cases.
• Reasons for Suspension: The allegations leading to suspension were serious and included:
  • Negligence and/or breach of trust and confidence
  • Breach of policies (Dignity at Work, Social Media, Code of Conduct)
  • Breach of financial and/or security procedures
• Representation: Of the employees involved, 13 were represented by a union, while 5 represented themselves. No employees used an independent employment lawyer.
• Outcomes: No cases proceeded to an employment tribunal. However, the UKGC confirmed that 2 cases were settled prior to a tribunal hearing.

Notably, the Commission stated it had opened zero investigations for performance-related reasons during this period.

What Information Was Withheld?

While the FOI response provides a top-level overview, the UKGC declined to provide several key details, citing Section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, which protects personal data.

Information withheld from the public includes:

• The specific grades or seniority of the employees under investigation.
• The financial cost of the two pre-tribunal settlements.
• The total value of settlement agreements.

This means that while we know settlements occurred, the cost to the public purse remains undisclosed. The refusal to provide employee grades also means it is not possible to determine if these issues involved junior staff or senior decision-makers.

The data shows that instances of misconduct within the regulator are investigated, but the use of settlements and data protection exemptions means full transparency on the outcomes and costs is not available.