[Joe8Bit]

As a note: the above comments advice is probably specific to the US.

In the UK, for instance, terminating someone for reporting sexual harassment is a very good way of losing a lot of money at a subsequent Employee Tribunal and getting your company fined. There's a lot of great precedent for siding with the reporter, even if other flimsy reasons are given for their termination.

However, the point made is a correct one. An HR person has a duty not to you but to the company, so never assume they have your best interests at heart.

[mtrimpe]

The comment was actually based on experience in the Netherlands; which has similar if not stronger employee protection than the UK.

If your case is as clear-cut as the one in this article you might indeed not need a lawyer but if there's any wiggle room; if it's discrimination and not harassment and the accused is sufficiently important to the company and HR judges that you might not have the energy to file a lawsuit etc. etc. etc. then it's still very easy to end up getting kicked out of the company.

[the_af]

The above advice (grandparent post) is also accurate for countries in Latin America. I vouch for that. HR doesn't have the employee's best interests at heart. It's not that they will actively seek to harm you, of course; it's just that they strive to protect the company at all costs, even if that means undermining you. All other things being equal they will help you, but things are seldom "equal", especially in cases of unjust treatment by a manager, abuse, etc.

[yclept]

This is the same case in the US but you can still be out of a job which is a serious problem for many.