'THERE'S BEEN A CHANGE I SHALL BE DEALING WITH YOUR GRIEVANCE.'
Knights has axed all of its HR managers and is not replacing them, RollOnFriday has learned.
One quit and the other three were made redundant last month. “Apparently we don’t need them for a 1,500 workforce”, said an insider.
The HR managers dealt with employee issues like mental health and grievances, but those matters will now be handled directly by the firm's Client Service Directors, RollOnFriday understands.
Equivalent to regional managers, a CSD's main role is “chasing invoices, increasing revenue and reducing costs”, said a source.
Concerns have been raised by insiders that CSDs do not possess the knowhow to deal with complex employee issues. “They're not trained as people managers, let alone have any HR experience”, said a source.
"If we have health issues we're expected to go to our team leaders", an amused/horrified employee messaged ROF after learning of the change.
Knights has retained its HR admin assistants, however their job is primarily to process routine requests in relation to sick leave and holiday.
Others queried whether the CSDs had sufficient capacity to deal adequately with HR matters, given they oversee multiple offices and frequently manage upwards of 100-200 staff.
“Have they got time to sit with people for an hour and a half to talk about their mental health issues?” asked a source, who pointed out that the listed firm was set to expand even more.
“Knights has no intention of staying the size that it is. We recently had the annual conference and our CEO made the announcement that we’ll be doing probably three to four acquisitions a year for the next five years - so we will be double the size we currently are”.
“You're talking about a company with potentially 3,000 people with, in their minds, no HR. Good luck with that one.”
The change appears to mean that staff now have to raise any grievances directly with their manager, which has puzzled some staff.
“Would you go to your boss, who on one hand is telling you to increase your hours, chase your bills, and make sure that you're making money for the business – and talk to them about potential discrimination, poor management and mental health? I doubt that”, said one.
Knights insiders predicted that the absence of HR managers in meetings to ensure client service directors acted “professionally and legally” would result in more employment claims.
However, they said it could also increase staff turnover at the listed company. “Several more claims will come through, but I think turnover will increase quite drastically because people will make the decision to just leave because they're not able to communicate or talk about their problems”, said one individual.
Knights’ HR-free strategy was described by sources as “short-sighted” and a “cost-cutting” exercise which “shows quite clearly to their employees what they think of them”. Or, maybe: it's a brilliant plan.
Knights declined to comment.
Comments
Ive always wondered why you need so many people in HR they can be replaced by AI.
Do you think these savings will be used to increase staff wages? Did we learn about this novel approach to hr on the golf course
God help them
Terrible decision proven by it being totally off market. Mind you, what do you expect from an employer like Knights?
“Several more claims will come through, but I think turnover will increase quite drastically because people will make the decision to just leave because they're not able to communicate or talk about their problems”, said one individual.”
Not sure that’s entirely on all fours with the SRA’s rules and regulations about workplace culture?
Typical from Knights. Unilaterally cut employees salaries during the pandemic. No billing targets, then billing targets. No need to come in to the office, now come in every day. Sue your own clients when they are a bit late paying a bill. It's quite funny to watch now that I'm not working there!
After their fantastic success in ruining the Leeds office you'd think they'd have learned something - but apparently not...
"We recently had the annual conference and our CEO made the announcement that we’ll be doing probably three to four acquisitions a year for the next five years - so we will be double the size we currently are".
Oh boy... . Here comes the next Axiom. Better strap in and start setting aside £1,000 for the next round of SRA one-off levies.
another person from HR tells the person from HR they are losing their job.
You've got to remember that these are just simple leaders. These are people of the greed. The common clay of listed law. You know... morons.
Knights HR-uuurrrrgh, CSDs busy on the downvoting already.
By the way, RoF, excellent Photoshop work and caption on this. 10/10
I wonder whether part of that move is that HR isn't really a respected role in the UK and Knights feels that anyone can do that job. HR are often portrayed as the least qualified "professional" people in an organisation: they either do purely administrative duties or get tasked with staff entertainment, the odd mental health training and doing the firing of employees when the partner in charge is too chickenshit to do it. I've yet to meet someone outside of HR who takes HR seriously.
When I worked in Australia for a few years, HR carried a very different reputation - they were trained and tasked with managing all the human issues in the firm across the levels of seniority, from payroll to mental health to dispute mediation, internal misconduct investigations, recruitment, salary negotiations, opposition research (i.e. how other firms treat their staff) etc. etc.
HR were also paid much better in Oz - or so I was told by HR staff who had moved from the UK Down Under.
My experience in private practice was that HR mostly dealt with administrative tasks, while substantive HR issues were resolved through conversations with the partners in the relevant department.
And if your HR complaint is about the CSD - who do you go to??
Say what you will about Knights plc, but this seems to be the first bright move they have made since inception. Every single HR “professional” I have encountered has been utterly gormless.
Utterly mind boggling, even by their own low standards.
Do tell, what are you meant to do if you have an issue with your CSD?! And good luck trying to pin down certain CSDs for any sort of chat, never mind this type.
Hopefully the staff can club together and submit a torrent of HR issues to the CSDs in the coming weeks *snigger
"Ive always wondered why you need so many people in HR they can be replaced by AI."
Can they though? Really? Is AI really capable of doing what a skilled HR professional can? Like, is AI going to get tipsy at the Christmas Party, agree with your suggestion to 'go to the pub round the corner', collapse into elated perspiration-soaked exhaustion twelve hours later, and then look at you with a shy mixture of awkwardness and awe on Monday morning across the open plan office?
Come back to me when your AI can do that part of the job you pointy-headed pencil pushing pointdexters.
"HR are often portrayed as the least qualified "professional" people in an organisation: they either do purely administrative duties or get tasked with staff entertainment"
See. This dude knows what a high quality HR professional can deliver.
Admin by day, mindblowing staff entertainment at seasonal festivities and awards dinners.
Worth every penny and Knights are clearly morons.
How on earth does this firm manage to recruit people? It sounds absolutely horrific.
Christmas party immediately became a lot more fun!
Ive always wondered why you need so many Solicitors and people in HR they can be replaced by AI.
I feel most sorry for the CSDs. Imagine having higher-ups breathing down your neck about reaching divisional billing targets and now you have to manage Carl's drinking problem and Sally's groping allegations and here comes Paul in tears over something.
Like most train crash this is starting slow then there will be sudden derailing
Knights have belittled hr since before they listed. The last HRD was from their employment team and basically the henchman! I take it this doesn’t affect the other employment lawyers doing hr, just the hr professionals? Oh well lie down with dogs, get up with fleas! If you don’t fee earn - cut!
Anon @10:13 - whilst that may have been your experience in private practice, your comment overlooks the fact that there are no partners at Knights. Merely a group of individuals who have been given a different title to some of the other groups of individuals. They are absolutely not in a position to exercise any degree of management, control, experience or decision-making whatsoever. Going to a “partner” with a substantive HR issue would be an entire waste of time, because they can’t do anything about it unless and until they’ve involved the relevant CSD. The partners do not manage their teams, the CSDs manage everybody. It takes a while for the full implications of that to really hit home…
Where does this stand with the firm's insurers?
It makes perfect sense to me - everybody here lives in fear. Nobody has had balls big enough to go to HR for years - it would go straight back to the CSD. No point paying a HR team staffed with CSDs and their cronies
"Nobody has had balls big enough to go to HR for years"
They can't be that insatiable, surely?
If it was a BD team, then fair enough, we all know what that's like, you could die of dehydration and they'd still be up for another round. But I think that you're exaggerating a little with HR people.
Missed Knights on ROF, although this doesn’t quite compete with the dumping of shares by board members weeks before a profit warning or hiking hourly rates after a round of golf. As if people are going to go to the CSD’s with HR related problems, they are probably the most unapproachable people at Knights!
Given that the main role of experienced HR managers is to stop the firm getting sued when dealing with it's employees I think we can expect to see some interesting stories about Knights emerge in the future followed by a recruitment drive for a new HR team.
Imagine having to take your HR grievance to the CSD that just came off the back of trying to sue an ex-employee for unpaid WIP that they had absolutely no liability for...
@08:30- They'd have saved much more money replacing lawyers with AI...
Sacking all the HR bullies? How did Knights manage such a progressive act.
If my firm did likewise, we would all be much happier.
Knights Dictionary:
‘Client Services Directors’ - they wield the whips in each office
‘HR Directors’ - see above…but now they’ve got tissues
‘Grievance’ - talk to the hand
‘Employees’ Mental health’ - Wahahahahaha get over yourself
I see the Knights bots are in full flow on the down votes.
Now now Anonymous 10 November 23 13:08
It's possible that all these CSDs are ex-diplomats with a comprehensive and up-to=date knowledge of employment law
And let's face it, employment law is absolutely not a minefield with regards to discrimination, harassment or bullying. In fact having an aggressive, profit driven manager as your primary HR contact is probably a very wise move. It'll be like going back to the 70s and everyone loves the 70s.
The money saved is about the same amount they have had to pay in costs after failing in their attempts to sue an exiting partner for irrecoverable WIP. The CSD who made that decision will be one of those responsible for any HR issues. Oh dear oh dear.
@Officedrone
Work in any other industry and HR is recognized as an important part of the company.
They are there for the employees , whereas in law firms they are there for the partners who actually detest them hemorrhaging their profits.
Even better in the good old days when it was simply and better named "Personnel ".
Knights#OneTeam unless you’re in HR that is.
With so many talented people struggling to rise to the top in the City it’s really staggering how many people actually currently running law firms turn out to be complete idiots. Well maybe not.
Hardoneby 12 November 23 16:02
You make the mistake that many employees make, which inevitably leads to their feeling very upset. HR are their for the company, directed by its senior leadership, to manage personnel issues. They most certainly are not there for the employees; employees have their own bodies, unions, other associations, their own lawyers etc.
I feel sorry for those being made redundant right before Christmas. The timing is absolutely awful but I’m sure the person making the decision won’t give it a second thought.
Not a firm I’d ever contemplate joining.
This is ridiculous. There is still HR so this article is incorrect. Anyone that speaks badly of knights that works at knights needs to be weeded out. They clearly aren’t team players and don’t want to work here. Leave then!
They continue to hire people who order our weekly fruit - says it all
This is a genius move especially with boozy Christmas events coming up. Without pesky HR bods, all that naughty behaviour can be swept under the carpet. Imagine how much time will be saved by not investigating alleged misdemeanors and by not giving hungover and teary people a platform. Knights, I salute you for your trailblazing vision.
Work in any other industry and HR is recognized as an important part of the company.
They are there for the employees
Couldn't be more wrong. They are there for the corporation. They are there to manage the resources whose humanity makes their management a particular challenge.
Wonder why ROF not letting us register the down thumb for Knights!! Bots in control maybe?
I have issues need hr to sort this no one to talk to and my go to hr manager no longer there she was lovely.
I have issues need hr to sort this no one to talk or they just had mental health awareness day ha
"Wonder why ROF not letting us register the down thumb for Knights!! Bots in control maybe?"
No, far more prosaic.
Whatever RoF has done to the comments function in recent weeks has completely screwed it. Can't format text, everything is in bold, voting buttons don't actually do anything anymore.
I'm sure that someone will tell me that it's a security update to stop bots from posting Viagra advertisements, but for actual human users its a major downgrade.
@Anonymous
In that case things have changed....for the worse
Bring back the 80's and 90's
@ Anonymous 10 November 23 10:03 - nice Blazing Saddles ref. LOL
Assume the evil overlords were unhappy that HR were expecting them to work within the scope of employment law. It does mean that ex-employees have a better chance of taking them to tribunal and winning😘 in my experience non-HR people tend to have a cowboy approach to dealing with issues.