The Financial Conduct Authority and Prudential Regulation Authority said the 61-year-old American had made “serious errors of judgment” and “failed to act with due skill, care and diligence” in his response to an anonymous letter received by the bank in June 2016.
Barclays said it would reduce his bonus for that year by £500,000.
The bank’s own whistleblowing systems and controls were criticised and it must now report annually to the two regulators detailing how it handles whistleblowing.
Staley said: “I have consistently acknowledged that my personal involvement in this matter was inappropriate, and I have apologised for mistakes which I made.
“I accept the conclusions of the board, the FCA and the PRA and the sanctions which they have each applied.”
PENALTY: ” Barclays chairman John McFarlane said it had made “a very significant adjustment” to Staley’s bonus.
He has been reprimanded, but both the board and shareholders have given him their backing.
Staley became involved after a letter that claimed to be from a Barclays shareholder was sent to the bank containing various allegations, some of which concerned him.
Regulators said he had a conflict of interest in relation to the letter and needed to take particular care to “maintain an appropriate distance” from the bank’s compliance investigation.
But having initially accepted advice from senior colleagues not to try to identify the author, he later instructed group security to investigate.
The FCA’s Mark Steward said: “Mr Staley breached the standard of care required and expected of a chief executive in a way that risked undermining confidence in Barclays’ whistleblowing procedures.
“Whistleblowers play a vital role in exposing poor practice and misconduct in the financial services sector. It is critical that individuals are able to speak up anonymously and without fear of retaliation if they want to raise concerns.”
Staley ” Treasury select committee chair Nicky Morgan MP plans to question the FCA about the fine, adding: “We’ll ask why it believes that the fines are appropriate, and what it believes the implications are for the senior managers regime.