Chester 01244 405 555

Grosvenor Court
Foregate Street Chester
Cheshire CH1 1HG
DX: 19990 Chester

Shrewsbury 01743 443 043

Lakeside House
Oxon Business Park
Shrewsbury SY3 5HJ

Manchester 0844 800 8346

Pall Mall Court
61-67 King Street
Manchester M2 4PD

Send us a message
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Local Offices

Peninsula’s Problems

15th March, 2017

Lots of businesses consider using HR Consultancies as they perceive a costs saving, however, the most well known, Peninsula, has recently been faced with dealing with a Tribunal claim itself brought by ex employee (he was dismissed for redundancy following the issuing of an ET1), Mr L Baker, who was a “lawyer” providing legal advice and representation in tribunal hearings. Solicitor and Barrister is a defined qualification, lawyer is not. Peninsula’s troubles in this case might be of interest to employers.

The main issue in this case was whether Mr Baker could successfully claim harassment when he had not actually established that he is disabled under Section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. The answer was no.

Mr Baker had in January 2014 told Mr Ramsbottom, Peninsula’s Advocacy Manager, that he had dyslexia.  An Occupational Health Report recommended reasonable adjustments and stated that Mr Baker was likely to be considered disabled.

Following this, Mrs English, Peninsula’s Director of Legal Services, decided to carry out the surveillance because she suspected that Mr Baker was not devoting the whole of his time and attention to Peninsula’s work. Mrs English denied knowing that Mr Baker was alleging that he was a disabled person when she authorised the surveillance although she was aware that he had been referred to occupational health.

Mr Baker claimed that by putting him under surveillance between 1-5 September 2014, and only telling him about the covert surveillance for the purpose of a disciplinary, amounted to unwanted conduct related to the protected characteristic of disability and that this had the effect of violating his dignity and/or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for him.

The Employment Tribunal (ET) found in favour of Mr Baker stating that Peninsula had:

reacted adversely to the evidence of an individual’s disability and engaged in an aggressive and unjustified strategy against an employee. The trigger is the disability issue. This is a clear case of harassment related to disability”.

Peninsula appealed and the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) overturned the ET’s decision stating that:

In my judgement the ET was bound, on the basis of the findings it made, to dismiss the harassment claim, because the Claimant had not shown that he was a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 of the 2010 Act. The harassment claim was therefore bound to fail”.

Perhaps just as interesting is the fact that despite describing themselves as the leading HR, employment law and health & safety consultancy firm, Peninsula decided to instruct solicitors and a barrister in relation to defending this claim. It appears when their own interests are at stake, their own team was not used. It also appears that this is not a fact that they wish to advertise. Daniel Barnett, employment law barrister, claims that Peninsula has blocked him on Twitter following his tweet which stated:

Interesting how @peninsual_uk instruct a proper barrister when they want a proper job done bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT….#ukemplaw

Our view is that HR always has its place, but that is not doing the work of solicitors or barristers.

If you need Employment Law advice that you can trust, please contact our Employment department.

Paul Bennett

Partner in Professional Practices and Employment Law
Email: [email protected]
Tel: 01743 453685

You might also be interested in...

Insolvency Partner Jan Chillery attends the JIEB graduation ceremony

20th June, 2017

Jan Chillery attended the JIEB graduation ceremony on Friday 16 June at Chartered Accountants’ Hall in Moorgate, home to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales. Jan passed all three insolvency exams in November 2016, qualifying her as an insolvency practitioner.  At present Jan does not intend to take appointments but passing these exams shows her... Read More »

SRA: The proposed new Code of Conduct 2018 and Solicitors Accounts Rules 2018

19th June, 2017

“The proposed new Code of Conduct 2018 and Solicitors Accounts Rules 2018 were confirmed by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) last week. Professional Practices Partner, Paul Bennett, spoke to Legal Futures one of the legal markets key publishers about matters: To see Paul’s thoughts please click here and you will be redirected to the full piece on the Legal... Read More »

Roundtable: Professional indemnity insurance

12th June, 2017

Paul Bennett, Partner in Employment Law and Specialist in Professional Practices, was invited to participate in The Gazette’s 2017 roundtable discussion on PII. The professional indemnity insurance market for solicitors has, within a few years, become the preserve of stable, ‘rated’ insurers, premiums have fallen, and for smaller firms the choice of insurers has increased. The end of... Read More »

Contact Us