I lost my job due to performance issues, but they weren’t mine.
- Andrea Wainwright
- 2 days ago
- 3 min read
There’s an elephant in the room that most organisations avoid naming:
discrimination is expensive.
Not just morally. Operationally. Financially. Reputationally.
Allowing it isn’t a “people issue”, it’s an organisational performance failure.
So I use my first hand experience, to help companies avoid similar mistakes.
I was a long‑serving senior leader with a strong track record, industry awards, and a reputation for delivery. Then I was diagnosed with breast cancer and needed time off for treatment. Treatment that saved my life.
From that point on, the organisation’s performance failed.
Not mine.
Roles reassigned without process.
Governance abandoned.
Equality duties ignored.
HR conduct that created confusion, contradiction, and mistrust.
And ultimately, litigation built on claims that collapsed under evidence.
Conduct that was, in the end, unlawful.
These weren’t personal issues.
They were organisational performance issues and they were costly.
This case has since been cited in national press and legal commentary as a significant discrimination ruling.
When HR fails, the business pays:
in talent, in credibility, in legal exposure, and in operational stability.
Discrimination isn’t just wrong.
It’s a performance failure with a price tag.
So the real question is this:
How do you make sure your HR function isn’t the weakest link in your organisation’s performance chain and how do you audit their impact before it becomes a liability? Should companies face the cost of HR errors and how can they be avoided?
Here are some key take away points to consider.
1. Are decisions documented, consistent, and traceable?
If HR can’t show:
- the rationale
- the process
- the evidence
- the governance trail
…then you don’t have HR.
You have risk.
2. Do managers receive clear, lawful guidance, or vague “advice”?
High‑performing HR gives managers:
- clarity
- confidence
- compliance‑aligned options
Underperforming HR gives managers:
- ambiguity
- contradictory instructions
- decisions that later collapse under scrutiny
If managers are confused, HR is underperforming.
3. Are equality duties understood and applied in real time?
Not in theory.
Not in policy documents.
In actual decisions.
If HR treats equality as a “nice to have” rather than a legal obligation, the organisation is already exposed.
4. Does HR escalate concerns, or bury them?
Healthy HR surfaces risk early.
Weak HR hides it, delays it, or reframes it as “performance issues” in the wrong direction.
If HR avoids escalation, you’re not avoiding conflict.
You’re accumulating liability.
5. Are employees treated consistently during illness, pregnancy, disability, or crisis?
This is the pressure test.
This is where culture is revealed.
This is where organisations either demonstrate integrity, or expose their weakest link.
If treatment changes the moment someone becomes vulnerable, HR is not performing.
They’re failing.
6. Does HR protect the organisation’s reputation, or damage it?
Litigation.
Turnover.
Loss of senior talent.
Public judgments.
Internal distrust.
These are not “people issues”.
They are performance indicators that your HR function is underperforming.
The truth is simple:
You can’t claim to be a high‑performing organisation if your HR function is operating below standard.
HR is not an administrative service.
It is a risk‑management function.
When it underperforms, the entire organisation carries the cost.
“Culture is revealed in what we tolerate.”
— Peter Drucker (attributed)
Having lived the consequences of organisational failure first-hand, I am committed to helping organisations succeed through stronger HR, optimised systems, and aligned strategy, growth, and projects. The foundation of Success Consult.
Other legal reviews.
Keywords / legal references:
A Wainwright v Cennox plc
disability discrimination, constructive dismissal, HR governance failure, equality duties, organisational risk
Comments