ceo

IT COMES FOR THEM ALL


Nicola Foulston, the Chief Executive of RBG, has been sacked after the listed company’s board lost confidence in her leadership and became aware of 'cultural issues'.

RBG runs law firm Memery Crystal, dispute resolution specialist Rosenblatt, and litigation finance provider Lionfish.

Like certain other listed legal businesses (*cough* Ince, *hack* Knights) its share price went into freefall and has been bumping stubbornly along at a much reduced rate ever since.

Like Ince, the CEO has been blamed for stocks trading a few pence above ‘worthless’. RGB's board did not sugarcoat Foulston’s firing, announcing to the market that it “has lost confidence in its Chief Executive, Nicola Foulston, as a result of cultural concerns and the execution of the Group's strategy”.

As a result “her employment contract has been terminated with immediate effect”, it said, omitting to thank her for her service or wish her well in her future endeavours.

The announcement saw RBG’s share price rally to 52p, although there’s admittedly still quite a way to go before the company returns to the 2019 glory days of a share price in excess of £1.50

Insiders provided RollOnFriday with a startling account of what the ‘cultural issues’ comprised, but their claims have not been corroborated. The colourful details were allegedly presented to the board in a report it is very keen to keep under wraps (if you have a copy, be a sport and send it our way).

It's a shame Foulston's off, as she had only just made herself known to readers. Last year she assured ROF she was a “fervent monarchist’ after royalist staff reacted with anger when, in the wake of the Queen’s wake, she told RBG employees that although the occasion was sad, it was “very much business as usual” for the company.

Foulston, who made £35m while she was CEO in charge of Brands Hatch when she sold the business for over $195m in 1999, could not be reached for comment.


lu

Grab LawyerUp at the App Store or Google Play and collect offers by doing nothing.

Tip Off ROF

Comments

Anonymous 03 February 23 09:10

Sexism innit.

If we had more female CEOs then GDP would double just like when we were back in the EU.

Anonymous 03 February 23 09:31

With the abrupt (and welcomed) departure of NF, we are looking forward to a brighter future.

OldFart 03 February 23 10:04

NF inherited her interest in Brands Hatch, so the £35m she trousered is not necessarily a reflection of her entrepreneurial savvy.

Anony mouse 2 03 February 23 10:09

The employees got called into a meeting shortly after the RNS to talk about the sacking. The COO, and now acting CEO, said his door is always open to those who are saddened / shocked and wish to talk. Kind but comical. The employees are delighted to see her go.

Ding Dong... 03 February 23 10:47

It feels like Christmas all over again!  Or the amputation of a gangrenous limb. Or exhaling after inhaling for too long... I think you get the picture. 

Dingy Donger 03 February 23 11:07

Clearly toxic patriarchal gaps in DEI and representational intersectionalilty is to blame for this!

Also the climate crisis...

Taylor Swift / NF 03 February 23 12:03

“It’s me, hi, I’m the problem, it’s me.” - The Anti-Hero, NF. 

Anonymous 03 February 23 13:41

She couldn't be reached for comment Jamie?  Looking at the pattern of forlorn and solitary downvotes, it looks very much as though she's right here.

Anon Poster 03 February 23 14:59

Please could someone give us at least a hint of what the "colourful" "cultural issues" were?

anon 03 February 23 15:57

These West End firms are very grubby. Hardly surprising to read that this particular one was so dysfunctional.

Son of Question Man 03 February 23 17:26

What were the alleged "cultural issues"?

How can we speculate about why Nicola was terminated? I mean, all we have to go on is a single stock exchange disclosure, and we know how unreliable those can prove under cross-examination!

Why didn't the employees take advantage of the COOs offer to discuss the matter if they had been affected? Can we therefore surmise that no employees had been affected?

A lot of people make unfounded allegations at the cost of their own career, family and mental health about wayward listed firm CEOs - why should they be believed without any other sources of proof?

Anon 04 February 23 05:52

Reflects badly on Rosenblatt’s management that they appointed her. Very poor judgment. Rosenblatt has always been an obscure shop anyway, but this provides yet a further reason never to instruct them.

I still don't get it 04 February 23 06:49

Given how law firms work, the way they are structured, the nature of the work itself, not to mention how clients work (or don't), and the potential for an almost endless set of competitors, I've never understood how floating a law firm could ever be a viable business model. Maybe gives you a short term injection of capital, but then you have shareholders to answer to, and their only demand is that you make them money - ethics etc will be secondary. Apart from a law firm business being a bad one to invest in as a shareholder, having a bunch of back seat drivers adding even more pressure to perform when you can't really change externalities and outcompete competition that will buy the work off you just seems suicidal. I wonder what Warren Buffet would do?

Anonymous 04 February 23 14:03

Although people are pleased that she’s gone, she was clearly not the only problem. The COO is lobbying for her old job, but people worry that there won’t be a positive change without management who are committed to taking necessary steps to make it a better place to work and to try to stop the mass departures.

Daughter of Question Woman 04 February 23 18:18

@3rd @ 17.26 - what career? what family? what mental health?

Correct though, what cultural issues.

You're learning, but not quite there yet. 5/10.

Anonymous 06 February 23 10:39

Why would having shareholders at a distance be worse than shareholders in the business (partners) who want to have authority over every decision just in case the really needed investment in new technology (a laptop for instance) does not "take the food from his children's mouths."   A listed firm can offer longer term incentives for all staff, not just those who happen to have a legal qualification and therefore share the profit of everyone's effort more equitably.  However, a badly managed listed firm is just as dysfunctional and unprofitable as a badly managed partnership. It is just that we don't seem to have found a well managed listed firm - whereas there are many well managed partnerships.  It is not the model, its the leadership.

Gerry 08 February 23 14:35

Looks like the 'cultural issues' was her using racist language in front of a black employee - namely, the phrase "n****r in the woodpile"

What's more, when said black employee alleged race discrimination, Rosenblatt denied this was the case, and had the audacity to call him a "f*****g anti-Semite"

It really beggars belief. Disgraceful treatment of the employee.

Sources - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/63e0cc838fa8f50e8a6bdf85/Noel_Deans_v_Rosenblatt_Law_Limited.pdf

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/firm-admits-deposed-chief-executive-used-racist-expression-over-dinner/5115070.article

 

rogermellie 08 February 23 15:20

You don't need to be listed to offer profit share. Last sentence is spot on though.

Argus Filch 08 February 23 15:42

“Oh dear, we are in trouble” 

Racist CEO: https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/firm-admits-deposed-chief-executive-used-racist-expression-over-dinner/5115070.article

Anon 08 February 23 18:39

Perhaps these mysterious ‘cultural issues’ may have been clarified in a recent report in the Gazette

Anon 09 February 23 09:32

Looks like my comment noting the racial slur was possibly moderated. FYI Rof this is public info - tribunal decision is here:  

https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/mr-n-deans-v-rbl-law-ltd-and-others-2201293-slash-2020

 

Anonymous 09 February 23 15:29

Leadership at some firms may not help, but it seems to be the listed model that’s at fault. Look at how the listed firms always congregate at the bottom of the ROF’s list of law firms to work at. That can’t be coincidence.

Today’s share price drives everything, promoting short-term fixes, such as cutting pay and benefits, and not investing in stuff like IT and back office functions. Firms become bad places to work, and so people leave. Partners in the traditional model tend to want to develop their practices and clients long-term, and to make that happen are willing to invest and reward employees properly.

Related News