It has been horrible to watch what’s happening at S4C play out. So I can hardly imagine how difficult it must be for the people at its heart, who are being written about daily in ways which they have found deeply humiliating.
Although one stark, devastating sign of just how difficult it has been is that for one woman it has culminated with her admission to hospital after taking an overdose. We should all wish Sian Doyle a speedy recovery and better days ahead.
Releasing a powerful statement about his wife, which really stopped me and my colleagues in our tracks when it was sent to us on Thursday, Rob Doyle said the report into his wife’s behaviour while she was chief executive of S4C amounted to an “assassination of her character”. And, in my opinion, it’s not difficult to see why he reached that conclusion.
Whether or not her behaviour has been unacceptable, this is not how the departure of members of staff from any organisation should happen. Mr Doyle called it “appalling” and it’s not difficult to make that case.
If you haven’t followed this story let me give you a (very brief) overview:
Welsh language broadcaster S4C is vital. It helps preserve and nurture Cymraeg and has helped build up an independent TV production sector in Wales.
Despite (or perhaps because of) its importance to Welsh life there is a widespread acknowledgment that S4C desperately needs to modernise to stay relevant in a digital world of streaming platforms. For example, we’ve been told that some prime-time S4C shows were only getting 6,000 viewers and that only 8% of Welsh speakers under 24 watch the channel
Former head of TalkTalk, Sian Doyle, was appointed the CEO in January 2022 with the brief to shake things up and make these changes.
In some ways she was very successful, with peak time viewing increasing by 16% and S4C’s share of younger viewers at its highest level for 10 years.
However, there were complaints about both her and her so-called “right-hand woman” Llinos Griffin-Williams’ management style and how they dealt with colleagues.
This led to the union BECTU sending a letter to S4C raising this issue and the chairman of the S4C board, Rhodri Williams, ordering law firm Capital Law to investigate and produce a report (which it is believed cost the licence fee payers £350,000).
In the summer, Ms Griffin-Williams put in a grievance against Mr Williams for bullying which was upheld after an internal investigation.
Two months later, Mr Williams sacked Ms Griffin-Williams for alleged behaviour while in France for the Rugby World Cup and allegedly involving former Welsh rugby international Mike Phillips.
Following this, Ms Doyle went off on sick leave. The contents of her sick note were reported on the website Nation Cymru despite Ms Doyle claiming that only three people had seen it.
Two weeks ago, Mrs Doyle herself was sacked by Mr Williams with the contents of the Capital Law report cited as the reason.
This week a summary of the report was published. You can read the full details of here. Parts of it were pretty unpleasant, such as where the people gathering evidence for it said that "the welfare of some of the participants became a concern" and that "10 of the participants broke down crying”.
The day after the report, Mrs Doyle’s husband released a statement saying he was at his wife’s bedside in hospital having found her unresponsive after taking an overdose.
Right, you are pretty much up to date, though please bear in mind I have summarised a lot there.
First, let’s talk about the report. To me, and bear in mind I obviously haven’t heard the evidence in full (though I have spoken to people who gave evidence), it read like a woman went into an organisation that was pretty set in how it did things and where many staff had been there a long time, and she demanded a lot of change very quickly. It also comes across that rather than get people on board with the changes (any change at your place of work is unsettling) she was pretty uncompromising in how she did this. Mrs Doyle has herself admitted that she “failed to bring people along”. She has also said that she made it clear to the board that the staff were not ready for the sort of changes she was been asked to bring but was told to carry on.
The report does also admit that the feelings of some participants were “based on stories or gossip from colleagues” and “not based on what they had seen, but rather, based on what they had heard second-hand from other members of staff."
There were one or two quotes which, when written down, don’t sound out of the ordinary. For instance, one person criticising the CEO said “they had to do what the chief executive said, whether they agreed or not”. To me this just sounds like having a job.
Other witnesses spoke of frustration with how Mrs Doyle conducted herself during meetings, saying that she would ignore people or use "negative body language, such as rolling her eyes to cast disdain". While it is obviously horrible to have your boss treat you with disdain, and not the sort of behaviour you’d expect from a good leader, these are not transgressions on the level of some things I have reported on and certainly doesn’t warrant the level of exposure and resulting humiliation she has been subjected to.
I say this in no way to diminish what sounds like a miserable experience for the people who gave evidence for the Capital Law report. It is clear that a lot of people suffered a great deal of anxiety and distress, and you could say this was directly because of how S4C was being run. Part of being a good CEO is building a team and taking responsibility for their wellbeing.
But whether Mrs Doyle behaved unacceptably or was a driven, talented woman trying to make changes in an organisation she cared about (I have had people argue both of these points) there are really important broader questions about the governance at the top of S4C.
I recently tweeted a thread about all the unanswered questions that still remain about the crisis at S4C. There are some things that I really think need to be looked at further.
How did Sian Doyle’s private medical information get leaked to the media?
Why, if Mr Williams had a grievance upheld against him for bullying, did he remain in post when I have seen S4C’s own HR guidelines which say bullying is gross misconduct?
Why was the man who was reportedly found to have exhibited bullying behaviour against a woman allowed to be the person who investigated and sacked her?
Was £350,000 a good use of public money to produce a report that cost £4,500 per person spoken to and provided no recommendations at all?
How has there been so little reaction from governments in both Wales and London to this situation and how can the chairman of a public broadcaster be at the centre of a crisis like this and not give any interviews? Imagine the outrage if this was the BBC.
I will be honest. A month ago, I wasn’t hugely interested in this story initially. It felt like tit for tat arguing. But there are now important questions beyond who said what to who. There are serious questions of governance and accountability here.
The statement that was put out by the S4C authority when they sacked Mrs Doyle staggered me. It was so personal. Normally when a company or organisation sacks someone the statement is brief and concise: “We have parted company with X, we wish them luck in the future”.
But instead they released six beefy paragraphs saying:
“The nature and weight of the evidence provided was deeply troubling. It has undoubtedly been a challenging time for many individuals. As Members of the Authority, we would like to apologise for the stress and anguish caused by behaviours experienced in the workplace.”
This brings me to the last point, the fact that there is no governmental leadership for S4C. The power to sack the chairman comes from DCMS in the UK Government. But throughout this process all the DCMS say is that “this is a matter for S4C”. That is a bonkers statement. If I have two kids and one is accused of bullying the other I can’t just say “it is a matter for them”. This is the UK Government’s responsibility and they can’t just wash their hands of this. After all, they couldn’t keep their mouths shut when it was the BBC and Huw Edwards.
Perhaps some will use this incident to renew calls for broadcasting to be devolved, which will give the Welsh Government control over S4C. While the Welsh Government may be a more attentive custodian it could also would mean that some of the funding for S4C will come from the Welsh Government block grant. This means that there would be a temptation to trim around the edges of that budget to fund other areas. There would need to be clear safeguards in place to prevent this though the amount it receives directly from DCMS is small.
S4C has important questions to answer, lots of them. For the sake of our broadcaster, we have to hold them to account and get these questions answered.
Thanks again for reading.
Please do send me your feedback. Have a great weekend.
Diolch
Will
To misquote Brendan Behan “I have never seen a workplace situation so dismal that an employment lawyer couldn't make it worse.” They have their uses, (and even the best can only operate within the ToR set by the employer), but when organisations abdicate their leadership obligations it never ends well. Sounds grim for Sian Doyle, while the chair seems to be Teflon coated. But f the reports are accurate about what happened in France at the RWC then it sounds like all 3 senior leaders are not suitable to deliver the required change. Kicking the can down the road is a toxic habit for organisations.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It is deeply upsetting to read of how all of this has affected Sian Doyle. No one takes an overdose unless they are in a state of terrible anguish. Let’s hope she gets the care she needs to recover fully.
The comments you make above - providing some detail I was unaware of - confirms my own thoughts on the bullying allegations. To me it seemed quite possible that Mrs Doyle’s task of reforming S4C was almost impossible due to the conservative nature of the organisation and that tensions arose because of this clash.
The story reminds me of two organisations I used to work with which went through similar scenarios, with a determined manager (both women as it happens. Is that part of the issue?) and a staff generally unwilling to change. Both were eventually forced out of their posts.
Another problem in the S4C story is the general unwillingness among the people of Wales to criticise institutions, especially when they are key to the survival of Cymraeg. And yet an ability to hold them to account is crucial if we are to save the language.