Can Civil Servants be Dismissed?

It is often suggested that British civil servants have "jobs for life". The truth, as ever, is rather different and more complex. This note represents the view of an informed amateur. As ever, I would be glad to be corrected (by email to martin@civilservant.org.uk) if I am wrong.

UK civil servants in practice have all the same protections as other employees. (In theory, civil servants are servants of the Queen who can dismiss us whenever she likes:- "the Royal Prerogative". But no-one would dare do that in the modern world and it may now be illegal under Human Rights law.)

This means that civil servant who mis-behaves is entitled to a fair hearing and to be punished (if that is the right word) in proportion to the misbehaviour. A really serious offence would certainly entitle his/her employing department to suspend him/her immediately on full pay and then dismiss him/her without compensation. But summary dismissal (or suspension without pay) before a proper hearing would not now be considered fair in the UK.

As I understand it, the Civil Service Appeal Board probably started life as an "in house" version of the "Employment Tribunals" available to other employees. But it is nowadays simply part of the internal appeals mechanisms which employees can use before deciding when and whether to take grievances and claims to employment tribunals or the courts (for breach of contract). And civil servants certainly do use such mechanisms, although most grievances are settled before getting that far.

There was a significant development in late 2003/early 2004 when it became clear that senior civil servants would in future have time-limited postings with a norm of 4 years. This was coupled with "better performance management" of "the 20% of people who are contributing least to their Department's objectives". It remains to be seen what this means in practice, although the expectation is that there will be more frequent early retirements of those who have "plateaud".

But "jobs for life" probably disappeared years ago. I have not checked the figures, but I understand that 50% of senior civil servants have in recent years left before age 60 (the usual retirement age) and that around half of those were forced, encouraged or lured to leave in various ways.

Role of Ministers

Ministers may not dismiss civil servants. Civil servants are employed by their departments and are disciplined and dismissed by other civil servants - and if necessary by the permanent civil servant head of the department, the "Permanent Secretary".

It is however relatively common for a Minister to indicate that they find it difficult to work with a particular official with whom they come into frequent contact, including in particular their Permanent Secretary, Private Secretary, press officer and driver. Put simply, working styles or personal chemistries may simply grate and it is better that the official is moved so that issues can continue to be dealt with effectively without personalities getting in the way. This should not reflect badly on either the Minister or the official - unless it happens often to either.

The Financial Times reported on 13 January 2003 that Margaret Beckett, the Minister in charge of the Department of Environment, had "ordered a ruthless clear out of senior officials in her department who lack the right skills or attitude. A leadership review of more than 500 managers ... will force out an estimated 15 to 20 percent over the next three years". But a Departmental press notice issued the same day made it clear that the Minister had merely "sanctioned the clearout", thus preserving the important rule that the Permanent Secretary decides these things, although he will certainly and rightly have consulted his Minister both whilst developing his plans and before deciding whether to proceed. The press notice made it clear that:-

The aim of the programme, which has been developed in consultation with staff, is to ensure that Defra's senior management has the right skills, competences, behaviours and attitudes to meet ever-changing circumstances and demands. The emphasis is on developing leadership skills for improved service delivery. It is one of the conclusions of the Joint Strategic Review, a review of Defra conducted by Defra and the Prime Minister's Office of Public Services Reform (OPSR). Defra is in the lead among Government departments in introducing such measures. The article's statements about demotions and a three-year 15-20% redundancy target are exaggerated.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's World at One on the same day, Jonathan Baume, General Secretary of the First Division Association (the union for senior civil servants) said that ...

... he thought the programme was a helpful exercise. He said there had been consultation with the FDA, and made the point that any suggestion that the programme was politically driven was wrong. "Defra management proposed this exercise and it is being seen as something of a pilot, so we're watching it very closely," he said.

"I was only obeying orders"

I have been asked what would happen if a civil servant were to (say) place a contract when they should not have done - perhaps under pressure from a (corrupt?) Minister? Much would depend on the reason.

a) If the civil servant had been given reason to believe that the contract should be placed - i.e. that all the proper procedures had been followed (including any necessary Ministerial authorisation) and the money was available - then they could not be blamed and the fault would lie elsewhere.
b) If they placed the contract in good faith but had not followed proper procedures then that would be regarded as a serious error which would lead to disciplinary action and maybe even dismissal.
c) If they placed the contract in bad faith (e.g. because they had been bribed) then that would be a very serious offence including under criminal law and they would not only face dismissal but also prosecution.

Our procedures do not allow Ministers to tell civil servants to place contracts in the absence of proper procedures such as advertising, tendering, etc. So a civil servant who complied with such a Ministerial order would fall under category (b) above and would be disciplined. The correct thing to do, if a Minster asks a civil servant to ignore proper procedures, is to ask the Minister to sign a "direction" which is then published. Ministers will not of course sign such directions unless they have a very good reason to do so which they are willing to defend in public.

"I didn't know what my officials were doing"

Ministers would nowadays not be expected to take responsibility for errors made by civil servants, unless they were involved in some way and might have been expected to spot that something was going wrong:- as stated by Maxwell Fyfe in connection with the Crichel Down case 1954.

Overview

All in all, therefore, our system has lots of what we call "checks and balances" which ensure that things seldom go badly wrong. But civil servants can be - and are - dismissed, and they if necessary have access to all the European style employee rights and protections that are available to their private sector counterparts.

Martin Stanley