What's Happening?
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled that external HR consultants are not liable for an employer's decision to dismiss an employee in a whistleblowing case. The case involved Mr. Handa, who was
dismissed from Station Hotel (Newcastle) Ltd after raising allegations of financial impropriety. The EAT found that while HR consultants were engaged to investigate grievances against Mr. Handa, they were not acting as agents of the employer in the decision to dismiss him. The ruling clarifies that HR consultants providing recommendations are not co-liable for whistleblowing detriments resulting from employer decisions, even if influenced by their findings.
Why It's Important?
This ruling provides clarity and reassurance to external HR consultants regarding their liability in whistleblowing cases. It affirms that consultants are not co-liable for employer decisions based on their investigations and recommendations. This decision is significant for HR professionals and employers, as it delineates the boundaries of liability and agency in employment-related procedures. Employers are reminded to clearly define the scope of services provided by HR consultants and establish who will act as the decision-maker. The case highlights the importance of careful and thoughtful execution of HR functions to avoid potential complaints.
What's Next?
Employers and HR consultants are advised to review and clearly define the scope of services and decision-making authority in employment-related procedures. This may involve revisiting contracts and agreements to ensure clarity in roles and responsibilities. HR consultants should continue to perform their duties with diligence to avoid any potential liability in whistleblowing cases. The ruling may prompt further discussions and evaluations of agency relationships in employment contexts, potentially influencing future legal interpretations and practices.
