Follett Stock managing partner accused of bullying female solicitor
The managing partner of Follett Stock has been accused of bullying a female lawyer, an employment tribunal has heard.
Chris Lingard
According to reports in the national press, Chris Lingard is accused of sacking solicitor Kate Baker from the firm because of her gender after she started a relationship.
Baker has filed claims of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination and unfair dismissal. In her statement to Exeter tribunal judge Christopher Carstairs, Baker, who was based in the firm’s Truro office, said: “Mr Lingard on many occasions told me that he did not want me in a relationship or to have babies.”
Follett Stock is using its own employment solicitor Guy Hollebon for the case and he was granted permission by the judge to file a defence, despite missing a deadline.The Lawyer understands the firm sent an email without the attachment containing the defence.
The full hearing will take place at a later date and there is a case management hearing in March.
Rougemont Chambers barrister James Bax is acting for Baker, instructed by Stephens Scown head of employment Terry Falcao.
According to the Daily Mail, Lingard criticised staff for taking lunch, the way in which calls were taken, the sign outside not being displayed properly, the radio, the blinds being closed, people leaving at 5pm and employees looking miserable.
It was also alleged that employees were not allowed to talk between the hours of 9am and 1pm, which the company allegedly called ‘golden time’.
In her statement, Baker also claimed that Lingard’s wife Fiona Higgins, the business director at Follett Stock, had sent her a text message confirming that her husband wanted her to remain single.
She accused the firm of “a culture of bullying, oppression, and lack of good systems and support for the employees…”.
Bax claimed that Baker was used a “distraction” at meetings where important clients “seemed to like” her appearance. He said: “She was popular with the chiefs. They were all asking about her.”
He said Baker was told she was sacked for making mistakes that included failing to diarise a hearing correctly.
In a statement to The Lawyer, the firm responded: “Kate Baker was dismissed for gross incompetence and inappropriate email correspondence. She raised no complaint before her dismissal.
“Anyone who knows Follett Stock and our managing partner will recognise her attempted characterisation of our culture and of Chris Lingard as a grotesque distortion of reality.
“Chris is very conscious of discrimination, being severely disabled himself. This makes Ms Baker’s decision to base her allegations on supposed discrimination particularly disappointing.
“Of course we deny her allegations, some of which are frankly laughable.
“Her suggestion that our policy of dedicating each morning entirely to our clients’ work means that ‘nobody is allowed to talk’ is a prime example.”
Follett Stock specialises in litigation and employment law and Lingard was voted in as the firm’s first managing partner in 2005 (20 February 2006).
Readers' comments (23)
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2013 11:04 am
I would have thought that Lingards failure to get his defence in on time to this was the ultimate display of incompetance !!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2013 11:12 am
so he is using the fact he is disabled as a defence? you can still be disabled and a sexist.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2013 11:57 am
In this day and age, it is quite unbelievable that any business, let alone a solicitors firm, could act in this way. Shameful
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2013 12:11 pm
Issuing a statement of more than one sentence and publically accusing a laywer of gross incompetence is gross incompetence in my opinion when litigation is underway - Baker has no choice but now to pursue her claim ...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2013 12:32 pm
"I can't be a *insert allegation of prejudice here*, some of my best friends are *insert prejudicial reference here*"
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2013 1:56 pm
The firms website says amongst many things he's about
finding solutions not creating problems and also he doesn't like coming second ... well it seems given the alleged treatment Miss Baker is presenting him with one very big problem; & his PR efforts have come a very distant second to the publicity she has attracted : where hasn't this been posted and reposted?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Worzel | 10-Jan-2013 2:09 pm
It was also alleged that employees were not allowed to talk between the hours of 9am and 1pm, which the company allegedly called ‘golden time’.
Indeed, as 'golden' as a freshly baked pasty.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2013 2:42 pm
First rule of effective advocacy only a fool represents themselves in court - using one of their own lawyers to defend this case is madness.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2013 4:06 pm
Playing the disability card is a strange thing to do in a sexual discrimination case.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2013 8:46 pm
His disability shouldn't play any part in this case. It has absolutely no relevance.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2013 11:26 pm
If you find yourself working in such an environment, and I am, then these are not issues that you can discuss to try and resolve with the partners as you are dealing with such unreasonable employers, you cannot raise a grievance it is a total waste of time and I have seen staff in tears. Any employer worth their salt wil treat staff the same way as they would treat a client they are equally important. Banish these bulies for good.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Jan-2013 1:12 am
How often does he use this card 'please let me off I am disabled'. This overall behaviour seems very odd indeed. I suppose all other behaviour will be brought forward by any previous employees who are either on linguards side or not !
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Jan-2013 9:20 am
Maybe having failed to diarise and submit his defence correctly he should be sacked for gross incompetence - and his wife sacked for inappropriate text correspondence....
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Jan-2013 10:12 am
If the text message was sent, presumably the claimant kept it. If so, doesn't look good for the firm - hard to think how it can possibly be justified. I think the comments about 'playing the disability card' are unfair and do their makers no credit. It's a valid point to say that he is alert to issues of discrimination because of his disability (presumably he means that he has been discriminated against). It's not a legal defence of course but I doubt that is what they mean. Still, don't think I'd like to work there.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Jan-2013 1:46 pm
The firm has openly made a potentially defamatory statement about her. As one person has already commented, she now has no option but to prosecute her claim (and maybe another) to try and clear her name. In my view, even if the comment were true, it was an unsatisfactory reaction.
This does not reflect well on any one involved and as a solicitor makes me wince.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Jan-2013 3:46 pm
It seems that one of the reasons for her dismissal was failing to diarise a court hearing "correclty". This could mean anything. Either she diarised the hearing or she didn't.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Jan-2013 5:09 pm
I know this firm fairly well and have met the managing partner on a number of occassions.
He never struck me as the sort to treat the ladies bad, but I did notice that his workforce currently consists of a number of very attractive women.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Jan-2013 9:34 pm
I read the reports about this ET case with interest and sadly, I am not surprised. I work in a firm that was taken to an ET and we all expected details to be leaked to the press and if they had been, they would have blown this case out of the water. I experience bullying, sexual impropriety, humiliation and foul language on a daily basis. The senior partner thinks its funny to send racial/sexual emails to us, especially when he has been drinking, I save them all, such is his confidence in his position so high above the law, he cant see how out of line and criminal he is. The partners are married and have no shame, you don't want to know. We are often told if we want new equipment or at least equipment that works, we are taking food from the mouths of their equally tedious children and so the answer is no. I wish this lady much strength and good luck in her case and for taking them on.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Tall Paul | 15-Jan-2013 5:20 pm
Anon 11 Jan 9:34pm - I work in a fairly mild-mannered law firm and am also told that I am "one big walking overhead" and constantly berated for asking for a marketing budet because the equities have "mortgages to pay, you know". That's just life at a law firm. It is not in any way unusual. I have had books thrown at me, been called the C word, irritated a senior partner until a vein on his forehead burst and blood trickled down his cheek. And I am male and 6ft 4". Oh, and this is a "nice" place to work. This sort of stuff happens. The law is not a profession for the mild-mannered. Whilst I understand that sometimes behaviour does cross the line, you shouldn't take part in a rugby match to complain that you "got hurt". If you get what I mean.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Kelly Matthews | 16-Jan-2013 11:04 pm
There is no excuse for bullying which does seem to be a recurring theme within the legal profession. Folks who work in other professions do not have to put up with it so why do lawyers? Also being civil and polite gets you much further in life than being aggressive - lawyer or not. Is that why the government never listens to the legal profession?
By the way, the last time I had a book thrown at me was by my schoolteacher - about 30 years ago.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Alex | 17-Jan-2013 4:11 pm
"According to the Daily Mail, Lingard criticised staff for taking lunch, the way in which calls were taken, the sign outside not being displayed properly, the radio, the blinds being closed, people leaving at 5pm..."
"...and employees looking miserable."
That made me laugh out loud. Brilliant.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 18-Jan-2013 1:17 pm
With this sort of publicity, the "Big Red Law Firm" will probably have a "Big Red Face"
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 18-Jan-2013 8:14 pm
I am in a similar position. somtimes you just have to make a stand and let them know what they are doing is just wrong and totally unacceptable.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment