Museum Wales’ £325k payoff ‘least-worst outcome’

Senior civil servants have defended their handling of an employment dispute that resulted in a payout of over £325k to the former Director General of Amgueddfa Cymru – Museum Wales – and legal costs of £420k.

On 30 November, the Senedd’s Public Accounts Committee heard from Andrew Slade, the Welsh Government’s Director General for  Economy, Skills and Natural Resources, who described the costs as reasonable, representing the “least-worst outcome” for taxpayers.

Asked whether the payment and fees provided value for money, Slade said that an employment tribunal would have taken about two years to resolve the issue, with the outcome potentially subject to appeal.

Labour MS Rhianon Passmore noted that a tribunal could have incurred significantly higher costs of £1.2m to £1.8m. 

The payout followed a longstanding employment dispute between the museum’s former Director General, David Anderson, and former President Roger Lewis, in which Anderson brought grievances against Lewis for bullying and discriminatory treatment. 

Under the terms of the settlement, Amgueddfa Cymru agreed to make Anderson, who stepped down in November last year,  payments of more than £325k.

A further settlement of £12k went to the former Chief Operating Officer, who also bought a grievance against Lewis, with total legal fees estimated at £420k.

During the committee hearing, Passmore asked why mediation did not occur for eight months after concerns were first flagged in the spring of 2021 following Lewis’s annual review. Slade responded that the government did not have a process in place to deal with a breakdown of relations between senior museum leaders.

In October, an auditor responsible for overseeing public spending in Wales raised concerns that the settlement may not have complied with the requirements of charity law.

Amgueddfa Cymru said in a statement that while it respects the Auditor General’s opinion, “some of the evidence provided has not been reflected in the report” and that “as a result, we do not feel it a fair representation of the events that occurred or fully considers the complicated circumstances which [we] had to resolve.