Badly treated Lambeth Council staff have been paid more than half a million pounds in compensation in the past three years - but details of why have been covered-up.
Confidentiality agreements which employees have to sign when the council settles out of court with them mean the details of why the pay-outs are made are never known.
A Freedom of Information (FoI) request showed in the past three financial years, £538,693 was paid out by the council in “commercial settlements” to staff who had tried to take the authority to an employment tribunal.
The 66 cases were settled out of court - 24 in 2006/7, 29 in 2007/8 and 13 in 2008/9.
Cases included racial and sexual discrimination.
Yet every case contained a confidentiality agreement stopping information entering the public domain.
A senior partner in a top legal firm specialising in employment law said the statistics “made a mockery of the notion of open Government”.
He told the Streatham Guardian: “The confidentiality card is being used too much by Government organisations, and Lambeth Council is obviously one of them.
“Often people are being given enormous settlements that are more than you would get in the private sector and taxpayers have the right to find out the detail of why.”
A council spokeswoman said the confidentiality clause in compromise agreements was “standard practice” and not specific to Lambeth.
She said: “Most confidentiality clauses are mutual and protect not only confidentiality for the employer but also the employee.
“The confidentiality requirement is generally subject to a few important exceptions, one of which is that the clause usually stipulates that the agreement terms can be disclosed to the Inland Revenue or other body as required by law or regulation.”
The FoI showed Lambeth Council was taken to an employment tribunal 38 times in 2008/9, for reasons ranging from wrongful dismissal for sexual orientation, to constructive dismissal.
The most common reasons were unfair dismissal (seven times)and sexual discrimination (four times).
Nine cases were heard by the tribunal, which found in favour of the applicant just once.
Some 13 were settled out of court, and 11 cases dropped by the applicant.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here