UK Charity Ordered to Pay ₹2.7 Lakh for Unfair Dismissal After CEO Misconduct Allegations

Allegations of CEO Misconduct

Julie Mayes, a community support worker at The Carrbridge Centre, alleged that CEO Matthew Gibbs exhibited aggressive and inappropriate behaviour, including shouting, making sexually suggestive remarks, and performing sexually suggestive dance moves in public at the charity’s Hub. Mayes claimed Gibbs frequently asserted his authority by shouting, "I am the CEO," during confrontations.

Mayes reported that tensions between her and Gibbs had escalated over the six to eight months leading up to her dismissal. She raised concerns about his conduct with charity trustees on July 18, 2024, stating that his behaviour risked retraumatising volunteers and service users who had previously experienced abuse.

Escalation and Dismissal

On August 21, 2024, Gibbs allegedly shouted and swore at volunteers after a service user complained about obstructed access to the centre. This incident left Mayes visibly distressed, prompting her to leave the premises in tears.

On September 4, 2024, trustees received an anonymous message alleging that Mayes had discussed Gibbs’s conduct at a community meeting. This led to suspicions that she was involved in a plot to remove the CEO.

During a fact-finding meeting on September 12, Mayes was questioned about the community meeting without prior notice. She was subsequently accused of gross misconduct and dismissed on September 30, 2024, after trustees concluded she was part of an effort to oust the charity’s management.

Tribunal Findings

Employment Judge Alan Johnson ruled that The Carrbridge Centre had unfairly dismissed Mayes, citing flaws in the charity’s investigation. The tribunal found that trustees relied heavily on an anonymous witness’s claims without verifying what Mayes had actually said at the community meeting.

The tribunal also determined that the charity failed to adequately assess the evidence, including Mayes’s allegations about Gibbs’s behaviour. While Mayes argued that her dismissal was linked to a protected disclosure, the tribunal did not uphold this aspect of her complaint.

The Carrbridge Centre was ordered to pay Mayes ₹2.7 lakh (£2,160.81) in compensation, though the organisation maintained its decision following an internal appeal.

What this means

Lazyfounder analysis — our interpretation, not reported fact.

This ruling underscores the risks organisations—particularly small charities—face when handling internal disputes and investigations. For founders and operators, the case highlights the importance of thorough, impartial investigations into employee complaints, especially those involving senior leadership. A flawed process can not only damage workplace culture but also lead to costly legal consequences. The tribunal’s criticism of the charity’s reliance on unverified claims also serves as a reminder to document evidence carefully and avoid rushed decisions based on anonymous or hearsay evidence.

Key takeaways

• Founders and HR teams must ensure investigations into misconduct allegations are impartial, well-documented, and free from bias, particularly when senior leaders are involved.
• Relying on anonymous or unverified claims without proper evidence can lead to legal vulnerabilities and unfair dismissals.
• Workplace disputes involving allegations of inappropriate behaviour require sensitivity, especially in organisations serving vulnerable populations.
• Employment tribunals may scrutinise whether dismissals are procedurally fair, even if misconduct allegations appear serious.

Related on Lazyfounder

• More business news