The Archbishop of Canterbury recently announced his decision to step down after a damning report revealed significant shortcomings in the Church of England’s duty of care. His failure to report the late John Smyth, a barrister involved in abuse allegations, ultimately led to the end of his tenure as Archbishop.
In this article, we examine the scandal that prompted the Archbishop’s resignation and the findings of the Church’s internal review. We will explore the failures of the institution and draw comparisons to the responsibilities of employers. Finally, we will discuss the lessons organisations can learn from this case, particularly concerning preventing workplace harassment.
Make sure to subscribe to our newsletter before you read on. At the Employment Law Review, we regularly publish sector updates and subscribing is the only way to remain informed. To get started now, simply hit the button above and complete the form!
Archbishop Welby Resigns Over Church Abuse Scandal
The Church of England has long faced intense public scrutiny following duty of care failures concerning a historic abuse scandal. John Smyth, who died in 2018, was a barrister who allegedly abused over 100 boys and young men.
While associated with the Church, he ran Christian summer youth camps in the 1970s and 1980s. This placed him in a position of significant authority, enabling him to physically, psychologically and sexually abuse 30 individuals in the UK and another 85 between Zimbabwe and South Africa.
Shockingly, it was reported that the Church learned of the concerns of Smyth’s behaviour as early as the 1980s. Yet, while they had this knowledge, the concerns went largely unaddressed, meaning Smyth continued his abuse for decades.
In 2017, however, a Channel 4 News investigation brought Smyth’s actions into the public eye. Much of the nation became aware of the horrific scandal for the first time. It was revealed that some Church leaders, including Archbishop Justin Welby, had known about the abuse for years.
Like what you're reading? Don't forget to subscribe to our bi-weekly newsletter!
The Archbishop subsequently apologised for failing to report Smyth’s actions sooner, but pressure continued to mount on him to resign. When the recent Makin Review exposed the full extent of the Chruch’s duty of care failures, Welby was left with no other choice than to step down.
Makin Review Paints Poor Duty of Care Picture
The Makin Review provided a comprehensive account of the systematic duty of care failures that allowed Smyth’s abuse to go unchecked. It documented how Church leaders ignored warnings and failed to implement adequate safeguards for vulnerable individuals in their care.
Appallingly, a “culture of silence” was found, often causing reports of abuse to be minimised, dismissed or outright ignored. This pervasive culture spread from local leaders all the way up to high-ranking officials, where protecting the Church’s reputation was prioritised.
READ: Benjamin Mendy Had to Wait Three Years for Unpaid Wages: Man City Former Footballer Wins £11m Case
Duty of Care Thrown Out as Church Leaders Fail to Act
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, was one such leader who had been aware of Smyth’s behaviour for years. While it was reported Welby could have potentially known of the abuse as early as the 1980s, he was certainly made aware of it when he became Archbishop in 2013.
At the time, the Archbishop was assured the police and other relevant authorities had been informed of the allegations. However, he didn’t take substantial subsequent action, and it was later confirmed the police hadn’t been contacted. Had Welby taken the appropriate steps, the report indicated further abuse could have been prevented and Smyth convicted.
This, along with the Church’s other duty of care failures, prompted the Makin Review to provide a comprehensive list of reforms. And when it was published, the exposure of the Church’s shortcomings led to thousands of signatures petitioning for Welby’s resignation. As such, when Welby eventually resigned, it was likely an acknowledgement of the Church’s errors and a step toward restoring credibility.
Upon resigning, the Archbishop discussed his “profound sense of shame at the historic safeguarding failures”. He also expressed his “sorrow” to all Smyth’s victims and prayed that “this decision points us back towards the love that Jesus Christ has for every one of us”.
Lessons for Employers: Addressing Harassment at Work
While the Church of England failed in its duty of care to prevent abuse, employers could similarly neglect their duties when an employee is being harassed at work. As such, the shocking case involving the Church provides several essential lessons for employers. But first:
What is a Duty of Care in the Workplace?
In the context of UK employment law, a duty of care in the workplace refers to an employer’s legal obligation to ensure the health, safety, and well-being of their workforce. This duty applies to various aspects of the workplace environment and employment relationship. When specifically focusing on harassment at work, this duty would cover preventing it, responding to incidents and supporting those who’ve been affected.
Safeguarding, Reporting, and Breaking the Culture of Silence
One of the key shortfalls highlighted by the Makin Review was the Church’s failure to adequately safeguard its vulnerable individuals. In UK workplaces, the same could occur if employers fail to comply with their legal obligations to prevent workplace harassment. Among other things, this could be resolved by introducing zero-tolerance policies and harassment prevention training.
Yet, safeguarding wasn’t the only issue showcased. It was emphasised that had the Church acted sooner, further harassment could have been prevented, and the perpetrator could have been punished. With this in mind, employers must ensure they have adequate reporting mechanisms in place and act appropriately once a report has been made.
Finally, the Makin Review revealed a “culture of silence” that enabled Smyth to continue his abuse for decades. If an individual is constantly being harassed at work, such silence would create a hostile work environment and leave them feeling isolated and alone. This can significantly impact an individual’s physical and mental health. As such, employers must foster a culture that encourages open communication, giving victims confidence they will be supported.
Wrapping Up: Why Harassment Prevention Should Be Every Employer’s Priority
Ultimately, addressing harassment at work and fulfilling one’s duty of care should be every employer’s priority. This will positively impact the workplace, where individuals feel supported and engaged, and help employers avoid legal action.
We hope you enjoyed this latest employment insight concerning the Church of England scandal and the subsequent lessons for employers. If you did, make sure to sign up for our newsletter now! It’s the only way to stay up-to-date on all things employment, and you won’t want to miss what’s coming. Subscribe now by hitting the button at the top!