Can Employees Bypass Hierarchy to File Workplace Bullying Complaints with Independent Directors? The One Thing Independent Directors Must Never Do Upon Receiving the Letter: "Attempting to Investigate

"If an employee distrusts HR, can they send a workplace bullying complaint directly to an Independent Director?"

"After receiving an employee petition, should an Independent Director personally summon the supervisor for questioning to judge whether bullying occurred?"

These are common inquiries raised by listed companies' boards and HR departments following the implementation of the new Workplace Bullying Prevention regulations on July 1, 2026.

As an Independent Director of a listed company myself, I pay particularly close attention to this issue.

Core Conclusion: Employees can certainly submit information regarding suspected workplace bullying to Independent Directors via existing company whistleblowing systems, dedicated ID mailboxes, internal audit channels, or other reporting avenues. This is especially true when accused parties involve presidents, board members, or senior executives, or when employees reasonably fear conflicts of interest within the standard management structure. In such cases, Independent Directors serve as a critical reporting channel in corporate governance.

However, a key distinction must be made: "reporting a grievance to an Independent Director" does not automatically equate to completing a formal workplace bullying complaint under the law. Likewise, receiving such information does not mean the Independent Director should turn into a hands-on investigator.

The true value of an Independent Director is not in conducting investigations personally, but in ensuring that the company has "qualified personnel investigating in accordance with the law, without anyone suppressing the case."

For labor law compliance training, board member continuing education credits, external committee members for workplace harassment/bullying, and litigation mediation representation, please contact Yesin Law Firm (Tel: +886-2-25156822; Website: https://www.yesinlaw.com).

1. Employees can reach out to Independent Directors, but corporate systems must clearly distinguish between a "Grievance" and a "Whistleblower Report."

Under Article 22-3 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the basic framework requires workers who experience workplace bullying to file formal complaints with their employer. If the accused party is the business entity's top person in charge (e.g., Owner, CEO, President), the law explicitly allows the worker to submit the complaint directly to local labor authorities.

Therefore, an Independent Director is not the statutory complaint-receiving authority for all workplace bullying cases.

However, from a corporate governance perspective, the matter cannot simply end there.

Corporate governance codes for listed companies mandate establishing concrete whistleblowing mechanisms. When reported matters involve directors or senior executives, they should be escalated to Independent Directors or Supervisors. Practical governance codes also emphasize that reporting units must maintain independence and enforce whistleblower protections.

Thus, when an Independent Director receives an email detailing supervisory bullying, they should not reply with: "You emailed the wrong person; please resubmit to HR."

From a labor law standpoint, the company may already be deemed to have knowledge of a suspected workplace bullying incident upon receipt of that email.

The correct protocol is to immediately verify whether the email fulfills formal complaint requirements. If not, assist the employee in entering formal channels; if a formal complaint isn't filed, evaluate whether the company possesses sufficient concrete information to initiate fact-finding.

In short: processes can be triaged, but risk management cannot fall through the cracks.

2. Independent Directors should refrain from investigating cases personally, focusing instead on ensuring statutory procedures are met.

This is a procedural minefield Independent Directors frequently stumble into.

Driven by a sense of responsibility after receiving a petition, an Independent Director might immediately call the accused supervisor: "Someone accused you of bullying. How do you explain this?" Some might even personally interview complainants and witnesses.

While well-intentioned, this approach compromises procedural justice.

Workplace bullying investigations require rigorous evidence preservation, structured interview sequences, opportunities for statement and defense, confidentiality, conflict-of-interest avoidance, and meticulous record-keeping. If an Independent Director questions parties prematurely, it risks contaminating testimonies, leaking confidential information, or giving the accused advance notice of evidence.

The proper question an Independent Director should ask is: "To whom should this case be assigned to ensure compliance with labor laws?"

If the accused is a middle manager and HR faces no conflict of interest, handle it through standard corporate channels. If the case involves HR leadership, the General Manager, or senior management—where the independence of the standard investigative system might be compromised—raise the governance level or engage external professionals.

Crucially, if the accused is legally considered the top person in charge, remind the complainant of their right to file with local labor authorities rather than trying to "resolve it internally behind closed doors."

Independent Directors are oversight guardians, not default members of investigation committees. Their primary role is oversight.

3. The true mandate for Independent Directors is not determining "who is right or wrong," but verifying whether corporate risk is controlled.

Upon receiving workplace bullying reports, an Independent Director's primary duty is not to immediately issue a verdict, but to ensure the organization activates proper procedures.

At least four key aspects must be tracked:

• Fact-Finding: Did the company lawfully accept, triage, or initiate necessary fact-finding?

  
  

• Protection: Are complainants, witnesses, and helpers protected against retaliation?

  
  

• Risk Control: If the accused manager still controls performance evaluations, promotions, scheduling, bonuses, or transfers, has the company instituted necessary risk mitigation?

  
  

• Conflict Avoidance: If senior executives are involved, has an independent investigation and reporting pathway been established?

  
  

These governance concerns directly impact the Board.

If a workplace bullying incident escalates into severe occupational injury, mass resignations, media crises, administrative penalties, or legal action, the question facing the Board will not just be "Did that manager yell?" but rather "The company knew about the risk—why did internal controls fail?"

Mature organizations must integrate workplace bullying into their internal control and ESG frameworks regarding human capital and governance risks.

Listed companies should establish escalation matrices in advance: routine cases handled by dedicated units; cases involving HR leaders or executives escalated to appropriate governance levels; and cases involving top leadership properly connected to external statutory complaint mechanisms.

Do not wait for an incident to occur before asking for the first time, "Who should this email be forwarded to?"

Advice from Attorney Chen Ye-xin

Can employees report workplace bullying to Independent Directors?

Yes. However, the organization must clarify whether the communication represents a formal workplace bullying complaint, a corporate governance whistleblower report, or general information alerting the company to suspected misconduct, and triage it accordingly.

Independent Directors should keep three rules in mind upon receiving a report:

1. Do not ignore or simply bounce the email back.

   
   

2. Do not attempt to act as a hands-on investigator out of eagerness.

   
   

3. Do not focus solely on individual fault; track whether corporate systems function properly.

   
   

Sound corporate governance does not turn Independent Directors into HR managers. Instead, it ensures an unobstructed path exists when HR lacks independence, when executive leadership interferes, or when standard reporting channels fail.

A mature system does not rely on a single line in the employee handbook stating "report bullying to HR." It establishes a clear governance roadmap mapping out who receives, investigates, oversees, and recuses themselves regarding middle managers, HR heads, executives, directors, and top persons in charge—including when external mechanisms must be triggered.

When the next email titled "I dare not go to HR because the General Manager is bullying me" hits an Independent Director's inbox, does your organization's Board know whom to forward it to, whom to oversee, who must recuse themselves, and when to take the case outside company walls?