UK Lawyer Sacked By Chinese Law Firm Owners In The UK For Not Speaking Mandarin

Yes we admit this is a typical Daily Mail story.. but at the same time it is a welcome to the future warning to lawyers out there as the world does more and more business with China and cultural sensitivities rear their ugly head.


The Daily Mail reports that? Robert Smith is suing former employers London firm Maxwell Alves after being told by bosses that they preferred Chinese lawyers instead of him
A solicitor is suing a law firm for racism,claiming that he was sacked for being ?white and British?.

The report tells us that? Smith was told by his bosses at the London firm that they preferred Chinese lawyers instead of him, adding there was no work ?for your kind?, according to papers lodged at an employment tribunal.

Smith has alleged that the real reason he was sacked was because the bosses, who were Chinese, did not like the way he had intervened to break up a row between the head of the firm, Dr Alan Ma, and senior director Florence Tou.

During the row, in February last year, Mr Smith shouted at them both, saying their ?behaviour was disgraceful?.

As a result, he claims, Dr Ma and Ms Tou decided to get rid of him, as they may have felt he ?tried to undermine their authority?.

Link to the full report at? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360954/My-Chinese-bosses-sacked-British-says-lawyer.html

Here’s what the Mail says

Despite Mr Smith working for Maxwell Alves Solicitors for two years, the law firm claims that they made him redundant because he did not know how to speak Chinese.
This was allegedly difficult as most clients tended to be Chinese people who had a poor command of English.

Mr Smith, 55, said he was left feeling humiliated by the sacking and had to take anti depressants to cope.
?It was a huge knock to your self confidence.

‘It was extremely hurtful when it happened. You do not expect to be discriminated against in your own country for being white and British,? he said.

He is suing his former employers for racial discrimination and unfair dismissal.

The case is the latest to highlight the growing concern about racism against Britons in workplaces across the country.

Mr Smith, from Mill Hill in North London, was a landscape architect for 22 years before he decided on a career change.

The divorced father of two, who already had a politics degree, completed a post-graduate law conversion course to qualify as a solicitor.

He joined Maxwell Alves as a trainee in 2008 and then became a fully trained solicitor, earning more than ?30,000 a year.
Maxwell Alves, which employs nine lawyers, was founded by Dr Ma in 2003, after he took over a British-based Brazilian law firm called Alves.

Mr Smith said that when he joined the company he was told there was no requirement for him to know how to speak Chinese.

His tribunal papers claim that for almost two years he mainly handled the cases of Chinese-speaking clients, and was encouraged to increase the firm?s pool of non-Chinese customers.

Mr Smith joined Maxwell Alves as a trainee in 2008 and then became a fully trained solicitor, earning more than ?30,000 a year

He mainly dealt with cases for people fighting to become legal migrants, as well as drawing up wills and landlord contracts.

Mr Smith accuses Dr Ma of cutting his workload after the row until he was handling just seven clients instead of his usual 30.

After he complained several times he was told by Dr Ma last August that My Chinese bosses sacked me for being
British, says lawyer he was going to be made redundant.

He had a meeting with Dr Ma to ask why he was being made redundant, and claims: ?It was made clear to me that I was being made redundant because I was not Chinese.?

Dr Ma said: ?The matter is an on-going dispute between Mr Smith and this firm that will be heard before a tribunal.

The particular phrase ?there is no work for your kind here? carries a legal definition and the way that Mr Smith relates the phrase to his being white and British is, in our opinion, distorted.

?Any claim for him being racially discriminated is strenuously denied.

In any event, we consider that it is inappropriate to make any statements and comments on the matter in advance of the tribunal hearing.?