Compliance Stuff

Many employers assume that initiating a workplace investigation after a complaint is inherently neutral and protective. A recent Tenth Circuit decision— Byrnes v. St. Catherine Hospital —is a reminder that the  way  an investigation is designed and conducted can itself support a retaliation claim if it appears biased or outcome-driven. The Underlying Facts A physician reported alleged sexual harassment by a colleague. The hospital concluded the complaint lacked merit. Months later, it conducted a one-day investigation into alleged misconduct by the physician, which included several notable flaws: The physician was never interviewed, which was contrary to the hospital’s investigation procedures No nurses were interviewed, even though “nurse concerns” were cited Investigators relied on selective accounts without testing contrary evidence Senior decision-makers accepted the investigation’s conclusions without independent review or giving the physician an opportunity to respond, u...

  A few years ago, a friend of mine was part of an organization that received complaints about one of its leaders, which led to questions about whether the leader should be fired . The organization debated internally about what to do, and after sitting on the allegations for months, management initiated its own investigation with the help of some inexperienced consultants. The results were disastrous, and the organization eventually ended up retaining a law firm to redo the investigation . In fact, the internal backlash from the original investigation was so strong that the organization had to commission a  third  investigation into why the original investigation went so poorly . In the end, the debacle dragged out so long that nobody felt like they had gotten a fair shake. Years after the organization first learned the allegations, it was still trying to recover from the fallout of the bungled operation. As you consider the place internal investigations have in your orga...