Inklings | What’s going on at Oxfam?

This is Inklings, where we explore how aid works in the wilds of humanitarian hubs, on the front lines of emergency response, or on the aid sector’s premier app for doomscrolls and hot takes, LinkedIn.

It’s also available as an email newsletter. Subscribe here.

Today: WFP’s awkward Starbucks collab, UNHCR’s new boss, the Global Refugee Forum, and, seriously, what’s going on at Oxfam?

Oxfam |

Oxfam GB’s leadership saga is spilling out across the UK press and on LinkedIn, unearthing accusations of bullying and racism and renewing questions about the organisation’s culture and governance. A quick recap: A Sunday Times story reported that Oxfam’s board ousted CEO Halima Begum, after a review alleged “serious issues in the CEO’s leadership behaviour and her decision-making”. Begum’s supporters came to her defence, saying a woman of colour was being scapegoated after overseeing cuts. An Oxfam board trustee accused those who leaked the story of trying to “destroy Halima and her reputation”. Begum’s lawyer denied accusations against her, said Begum in fact resigned, and is taking legal action against the organisation.

What’s emerging is a set of interlinked dynamics: staff complaints about senior leadership including Begum; a separate rift between Begum and the now-former Oxfam GB board chair, Charles Gurassa; an organisation emerging from months of painful restructuring and job cuts amid the broader aid funding crisis; and a woman of colour leading an 83-year-old organisation struggling with a legacy of abuse scandals that were worsened (an independent commission found) by a toxic work environment marred by racism, sexism, and colonial behaviour. 

There are competing narratives. Among them: a CEO accused of poor leadership or mistreating staff; an organisation and board accused of mistreating a CEO who is a woman of colour; a leadership team and board accused of poor management and oversight.

Oxfammers who spoke to The New Humanitarian offered different interpretations of the events and their causes, but agreed on a few points: questions about leadership and governance go beyond Begum; this is intensely damaging for Oxfam and possibly for the wider non-profit sector; and this was entirely preventable. “This is a mess. It should never have gotten to this point,” said one source, who, like others in this Inklings, asked not to be named in order to speak more freely. A few more details:
 

• There appear to be multiple grievances filed with the Charity Commission, the UK non-profit regulator. Oxfam GB submitted “a serious incident report relating to its leadership”, the commission confirmed. Separately, Begum has reportedly filed a whistleblowing complaint. A source familiar with the complaint said this was related to accusations of racism, sexism, and bullying. The commission did not address questions about other notifications filed. Begum is reportedly taking legal action against Oxfam, arguing constructive dismissal – where an organisation is accused of creating conditions that force employees to leave. There’s also a Change.org petition urging the commission to investigate Oxfam.
   
• There are multiple internal grievances and investigations, including reviews at the board level. The first is the review on Begum, which allegedly unearthed bullying complaints against her – parts of which were publicised in the initial Sunday Times story. A second is about Begum’s whistleblowing complaint, according to a source familiar with it. Oxfam did not respond to questions about this second review.
   
• There were multiple staff letters to the board. An October letter signed or supported by more than 100 Oxfam staff focused on complaints about Oxfam’s senior leadership, including Begum. Its critiques included a perceived lack of consultation around a restructuring that saw job losses. A separate letter in November flagged “racism faced by Black, Brown, and other BIPOC colleagues, including its CEO Dr Begum”, according to board trustee Balwant Singh, who has publicly contradicted his trustee colleagues. The board had not taken action on this as of earlier this week, he said in a written statement shared with media.
   
• Some Oxfam staff who signed the initial letter about Begum and leadership were surprised by this week’s news – they assumed their complaints were ignored. In its response to the October staff letter, the board told staff that the proper channel was an internal complaints line, not an anonymous letter, according to sources familiar with the letter and the reply. Some who signed the letter saw this as their concerns being ignored. But while the board stonewalled staff, some trustees appear to have used the letter as one of the reasons to launch a review of Begum. “It’s strange to find out there was an investigation,” said one Oxfam staffer who signed the letter.

So what happened? A few more observations from various Oxfammers:

• Many Oxfam staff were excited by Begum’s arrival.
   
  • “She brought a lot of hope when she first started,” said one staffer. “For the first few months, we were super excited about Halima coming in.” 
     
  • Another staff member agreed with the assessment, though they also noted misgivings that Oxfam had poached Begum from another organisation, ActionAid, and that Begum chose to jump ship after only a few months at the helm there.
     
• Concerns about Begum’s management, and treatment of colleagues, started to appear.
   
  • One staff member said they found Begum “unpredictable” when it came to enacting strategies and aligning with advice. “A real lack of trust developed,” they said. “Staff were just frightened what was going to happen next. I don’t mean the restructuring – I mean what she’d say or do. That’s a global thing – not just Oxfam GB.”
     
  • We didn’t speak to anyone who said they were bullied. Oxfammers who spoke to us said “really bad interactions” were common among colleagues. The staff member noted Begum would speak negatively about her colleagues, including senior staff. “She has this lovely nature. You’d think you’re having a really lovely conversation. Then she’d talk to me about other senior management,” the staff member said. “I think her behaviour is unusual to me. It’s unusual for people to go around and attack other colleagues in front of new colleagues.” Begum or her lawyer did not respond to requests for an interview. 
     
  • Meanwhile, Oxfam staff who complained about senior leaders seemed unaware of the dynamics at the board – which seem to include a rift between Begum and former board chair Gurassa, and a split among trustees.
     
• Cuts brought things to a head.
   
  • Oxfam was facing a budget crunch when Begum started as CEO in 2024: “She found that the financial deficit was even bigger than what she had been told,” a source said. “The board endorsed a major restructuring programme. And of course, staff were not happy. There were going to be quite a lot of redundancies.”
     
  • The restructuring and cuts accelerated through 2025. “People were going through quite a traumatic time,” said a staffer. “Some of us have invested… years [in the organisation] and that was all going to be thrown out the window.”
     
• Racial dynamics caught some Oxfam staff by surprise; others not so much.
   
  • “It feels like all the responsibility was put on the woman from an ethnic minority, and that’s what’s tearing me apart,” said a staffer who was critical of Begum’s management, but who also felt conflicted by how she’s become the sole focus. “I think people underestimated the racial aspects of this.”
     
  • “There is a big issue with the culture and with racism in Oxfam,” said another Oxfammer, “despite the fact that we go on about racial justice and so on as one of the pillars of our work.”
     
• This is about more than the CEO, or the restructuring.
   
  • Even staff critical of Begum told us they were puzzled by this week’s news. Questions about leadership and governance, they said, go beyond Begum. “There was legitimacy for an investigation into the leadership,” a staffer said. “Should it have been focused on Halima by herself? I would say no.” 
     
  • “The board should be held accountable for a lot of this stuff as well,” said another. “It’s not just about Halima. They’re responsible: they shouldn’t have been allowing these things to happen.”
     
  • Another Oxfammer noted that the restructuring was approved by the board, yet Begum seems to be taking the fall: “Did they bring in someone to do such a major change, and now we’re very quick to scapegoat that person when staff get unhappy with it? You require strength… to say, ‘We are going to make this change. We have to do it for the organisation’s sustainability’. Why are we trying to attribute all of the issues to her?”
     
• This will damage Oxfam.
   
  • The controversy is playing out in an unforgiving UK press and in social media comments, and adding to an already thick Oxfam folder at the Charity Commission. “There’s still amazing work going on despite all of this. And that’s really sad. We’re in the news again,” said a staff member. “It just feels like a mess. It’s embarrassing.”

• This is not a comfortable topic.
   
  • It’s more than a little triggering for some. Oxfammers were generally reluctant to talk, worried about being attacked online. Some worried about legal repercussions or impacts on their career. As it is, LinkedIn comments sections may not be the best place for nuance. What may come later: discussions about race and power, and about the tensions within a Global North organisation that speaks of decolonisation and fairer partnerships. It’s an uncomfortable conversation in a sector that’s not great at having them.
     
• The fine print: Oxfam did not respond to specific questions about what the board’s review alleged, Begum’s accusations against Oxfam or the board, other staff concerns about racism, and Oxfam’s relationship to a public relations firm said to be advising the organisation. Instead, it provided a more general statement. Begum or her lawyer did not respond to requests for interviews. We were also unable to reach Charles Gurassa, the former Oxfam board chair.

In other news |

WFP x Starbucks: Here’s a trend for 2026: more public scrutiny on awkward aid partnerships. The World Food Programme says it’s partnering with Starbucks – the kind of collab that draws an immediate rebuke in the arena of LinkedIn commenters. Some perceive Starbucks to be pro-Israel amid the genocide in Gaza (the company is not a BDS movement boycott target). Others point out the company is pals with Nestlé, which has faced various public health controversies over the years – including a recent critique for higher-sugar baby cereals sold in some African countries.

UNHCR has a new boss: Barham Salih of Iraq was officially named the new UN refugee chief on 18 December. It marks a break from the long string of Europeans helming UNHCR (and continues a longer string of men at the top – there has only ever been one woman). Salih, a Kurd from Iraq, is also the rare high commissioner who has actually been displaced (twice, he says). He starts on 1 January 2026.

Global Refugee Forum: Salih’s appointment wasn’t quite in time for the just-concluded progress review for the Global Refugee Forum, a stocktake on country promises for refugee policies. A tidbit picked up at the Geneva forum and sidelines:

• Refugee-led networks are intermediaries too: Refugee-led pooled funds deliver more to refugee-led groups than the UN’s refugee agency, and in larger grant sizes than international NGOs. That was noted at a parallel event held by the refugee-led convening network, R-Space.

Acronymage |

“HR, LNOB, and GEWE in CCA and CF – what does it matter?”

This line, swiped from a powerpoint from the UN’s humanitarian coordination arm, OCHA, landed in our inbox📥 recently.

One entry point for getting HR, LNOB, and GEWE in CCA and CF? “UN System-wide evaluation, MAF, IMS and QCPR indicators,” the powerpoint notes. 

After a long Inklings, here’s to both clarity and brevity in 2026. As this powerpoint shows, it’s a tough combo to deliver.

Have any tips, recommendations, or indecipherable acronyms to share with the Inklings newsletter? Get in touch: [email protected]