Comments on: Law in the 21st Century http://blog.usefullyemployed.co.uk/2008/03/26/law-in-the-21st-century/ An Employment Law Blog by a UK barrister Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:37:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Costs orders in favour of non-lawyers at Usefully Employed http://blog.usefullyemployed.co.uk/2008/03/26/law-in-the-21st-century/#comment-278 Costs orders in favour of non-lawyers at Usefully Employed Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:39:44 +0000 http://usefullyemployed.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-278 [...] & Ors v.Bowercross Construction Ltd & Anor ought to be cracking out the champagne. I have blogged before about the fact that solicitors are in severe competition with ‘consultancy’ [...] [...] & Ors v.Bowercross Construction Ltd & Anor ought to be cracking out the champagne. I have blogged before about the fact that solicitors are in severe competition with ‘consultancy’ [...]

]]> By: Compromise agreements - relevant adviser at Usefully Employed http://blog.usefullyemployed.co.uk/2008/03/26/law-in-the-21st-century/#comment-55 Compromise agreements - relevant adviser at Usefully Employed Tue, 08 Jul 2008 10:22:52 +0000 http://usefullyemployed.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-55 [...] law provision to Claimants is not through firms of solicitors, but instead (as I’ve blogged before) through multi-disciplinary teams owned more likely than not by insurance / bank backed [...] [...] law provision to Claimants is not through firms of solicitors, but instead (as I’ve blogged before) through multi-disciplinary teams owned more likely than not by insurance / bank backed [...]

]]> By: Usefully Employed http://blog.usefullyemployed.co.uk/2008/03/26/law-in-the-21st-century/#comment-20 Usefully Employed Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:48:33 +0000 http://usefullyemployed.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-20 I don't actually disagree with much of what you've said there - the function of an employment lawyer is different to an insured HR compliance product. The word compliance is key - the product says to the employer "I will tell you how to act correctly from a legal and HR perspective. I'll provide you with documentation, procedures and telephone support for what you want to do, and as long as you do exactly what I say I'll pay the bill if it all goes wrong." You preach HR orthodoxy to the client and pay for any mistakes in what you advise. Most competitive insurance policies no longer have a 'reasonable prospects' requirement before a claim is accepted, they instead have a requirement that you only do anything once you have their blessing. This means the advice function is very thorough - most services I've come across are professional enough so that if a dismissal can be done then it'll be approved, but it's interesting that you've picked out Peninsula ... What that product doesn't necessarily do is accomplish your wider objectives which is where the conventional taxi-meter lawyer comes in. His remit is much wider, and there will always be a need for him, but for many small businesses it's choosing the most cost-effective tool for risk-avoidance. I don’t actually disagree with much of what you’ve said there - the function of an employment lawyer is different to an insured HR compliance product. The word compliance is key - the product says to the employer “I will tell you how to act correctly from a legal and HR perspective. I’ll provide you with documentation, procedures and telephone support for what you want to do, and as long as you do exactly what I say I’ll pay the bill if it all goes wrong.” You preach HR orthodoxy to the client and pay for any mistakes in what you advise. Most competitive insurance policies no longer have a ‘reasonable prospects’ requirement before a claim is accepted, they instead have a requirement that you only do anything once you have their blessing. This means the advice function is very thorough - most services I’ve come across are professional enough so that if a dismissal can be done then it’ll be approved, but it’s interesting that you’ve picked out Peninsula …

What that product doesn’t necessarily do is accomplish your wider objectives which is where the conventional taxi-meter lawyer comes in. His remit is much wider, and there will always be a need for him, but for many small businesses it’s choosing the most cost-effective tool for risk-avoidance.

]]> By: Philip http://blog.usefullyemployed.co.uk/2008/03/26/law-in-the-21st-century/#comment-21 Philip Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:54:12 +0000 http://usefullyemployed.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-21 Problem is that if you offer insurance like Peninsula you potentially have two clients: the insurer and the insured. Those two clients interests are not always aligned and sometimes conflict. So an employer may want to fight a mischievious claim as they want to send out a message, whilst the insurer may want to settle at a commercial rate, say £2k. Who does the lawyer listen to, the insured or the insurer? Likewise as the lawyer is giving advice covered by an insurance policy, that advice may sometimes be far too cautious-in line with the insurer's commercial interests but out of step with the insured's commercial needs. The new landscape will present many problems like these. We find that clients do not change legal provider readily or easily. Problem is that if you offer insurance like Peninsula you potentially have two clients: the insurer and the insured. Those two clients interests are not always aligned and sometimes conflict. So an employer may want to fight a mischievious claim as they want to send out a message, whilst the insurer may want to settle at a commercial rate, say £2k. Who does the lawyer listen to, the insured or the insurer?
Likewise as the lawyer is giving advice covered by an insurance policy, that advice may sometimes be far too cautious-in line with the insurer’s commercial interests but out of step with the insured’s commercial needs.
The new landscape will present many problems like these. We find that clients do not change legal provider readily or easily.

]]>