Employment tribunals

I was reading a thread on here and someone rather glibly said to take the issue to a tribunal.
Rather than spend a long time typing I have pasted the current changes which show that going to a tribunal is not going to be as easy as some think from now on.
the cut’n 'paste is from an emplyment solicitors monthly bulletin, so i expect it to be fairly accurate.
I received it last week so the Monday referred is Monday July 22nd

Employment Tribunal (and Employment Appeal Tribunal) fees

Yes, it will no longer be free to use the ET system for the first time since Marc Bolan and ABBA dominated the UK charts. Issue fees, application fees (for some applications), a mediation hearing fee and full hearing fees will now apply.

Remission (non-payment of fees) will apply to some on low incomes but we expect that because many Claimants will have been dismissed and will still have to bring an unfair dismissal claim within 3 months of termination, most will not qualify as (very unfairly) for many their previous earnings (when employed) will be taken into account. Fees to issue and have an unfair dismissal claim heard will be a combined £1,200. For wages claims, the fees are very high (it may well often be cheaper to pursue such a claim in the County Court instead of the ET after Monday) at a combined £390. These fees are also not automatically recoverable. The burden of fees is nearly always to be borne by the Claimant and the Government’s plan is to deter Claimants and make more pre-ET settlements happen.

The EAT is also charging an issue fee and hearing fee.

  1. Unfair Dismissal cap of one year’s pay

The current cap of £74,200 will remain as the overall cap on Unfair Dismissal compensatory awards but that will only apply to those who earn over £74,200 per year. For those who earn less than this (the vast majority of the workforce), the compensatory award will be limited to the employee’s gross pay capped at a year (still subject to the normal deductions for mitigation, giving credit for new earnings etc). So for an employee who was unfairly dismissed and becomes long-term unemployed that employee will only receive a maximum compensatory award of up to a year of his or her previous pay.

  1. Settlement Agreements are here

This is not just a ‘re-brand’ but is designed to enable pre-termination negotiations to be easier for employers as long as they follow a new statutory code — this will no doubt allow certain discussions (as long the discussions are non-discriminatory etc) to be kept confidential from a Tribunal in most unfair dismissal cases. This will simplify the actions needed to be taken by an employer to get a Settlement Agreement ‘on the table’ and then agreed by an employee.

  1. ET Rules

Whilst most of the changes apply to both employees and employers equally, we believe that in reality the new Rules are more likely to be used against employees than employers, including greater strike out powers at an earlier stage, the removal of the cap on adverse costs orders (in reality, previous statistics show that more Claimants than employers have to pay these), stronger case management ‘teeth’ and so on. One positive however is that Judgments ordering compensation will now need the compensation to be paid within 2 weeks (instead of the current 6 weeks) with interest running from 2 weeks.

  1. New ET1s/ET3s

These are only being released on Monday — we expect they will require more information from Claimants, increasing the burden on them and they will also contain information about how low current ET awards are — with the stated aim of deterring Claimants from bringing claims in the first place.

These changes are without doubt enormous and are also largely business-friendly. The Government’s changes are designed to deter Claimants from going to ET, make more claims settle and reduce the perception of too much ‘red tape’ for businesses. Our view is that the changes will reduce access to justice for those who need it, those who are often in the weakest place — workers and employees who have recently had pay withheld by unscrupulous employers, those paid less than those of the other gender, those who have been dismissed or subjected to discrimination against.

Any union will cover the members fee for an E.A.T.this is just more legislation to discourage workers with a genuine greivance, from pursueing some of our draconian, victorian principled, big stick employers, the majority of whom belong to a trade association,(union), but discourage the worker from joining a union of their choice.(“we don’t need unions here mate I’ll look after you”, or ," we don’t recognise any transport union we only deal with XXXX")
Don’t let anti worker legislation deprive you of legal and lawfull rights, the jobs stessfull enough

Any union will cover the members fee for an E.A.T.

I wish I had your confidence!
The last time I raised the issue of my union (Unite) fighting a case for a colleague I claimed exactly the same thing.
The actual reply I received was that they would only fight cases that their legal representatives thought they had a chance of winning.that reply wasn’t from a regional officer or secretary but from the national office.
Regardless of that, I posted just to raise awareness that going to a tribunal is neither as simple or as easy as some appear to believe.

Why on earth would anyone pursue a claim that they didn’t think they had a chance of winning? (regardless of who was picking up the tab)

From personal experience - don’t bother. But then that’s what it’s all about.

If you have got a winning chance you should still go for it, when you win the other side has to pay your costs of the tribunal but not legal costs.

Will these new rules include people already in the process of a E.T ?

Richardf1fan:
Will these new rules include people already in the process of a E.T ?

No not has far as I know

unions only want one thing, your subs…

coming from a strong union family I was in unison for years, even on local committee, when I needed them they were less then useless! sold their members down the river by telling them to accept a £50 bonus for enforced change of contract, me and a few others went on our own and stuck it out, last day of signing new contract period we were called in and offered a contract pay out, inclusive of notice periods ect ect ,

so whatever it is do your own homework,

del949:

Any union will cover the members fee for an E.A.T.

I wish I had your confidence!
The last time I raised the issue of my union (Unite) fighting a case for a colleague I claimed exactly the same thing.
The actual reply I received was that they would only fight cases that their legal representatives thought they had a chance of winning.that reply wasn’t from a regional officer or secretary but from the national office.
Regardless of that, I posted just to raise awareness that going to a tribunal is neither as simple or as easy as some appear to believe.

I once took a company to court (and i’d been there 17 yrs) for constructive dissmisal after they severly changed the contract and the union first of all backed me in the initial stages saying i had a good case then all of a sudden they completely changed their tune overnight and didn’t want anything to do with it so i went on my own. Found out later the area rep was on the take and was banished to a desk job but still kept his job though but in a different capacity. :angry: :angry:

Roymondo:
Why on earth would anyone pursue a claim that they didn’t think they had a chance of winning? (regardless of who was picking up the tab)

Because some companies tend to settle out of court.

you have got a winning chance you should still go for it, when you win the other side has to pay your costs of the tribunal but not legal costs

Not now.

These fees are also not automatically recoverable. The burden of fees is nearly always to be borne by the Claimant and the Government’s plan is to deter Claimants and make more pre-ET settlements happen.

What a lot do not know is that ETs cannot rule on evidence but only on the procedures taken by the company

My mate has just been stiffed by Unite, he was going to tribunal for unfair dismissal and with less than a week to go before the tribunal, Unite claims he hasn’t been a member long enough to be represented!
They made a huge fuss of him, promised him the earth and how they would bring the company to its knees, even told him not to take full time work in the interim to make his claim look better! Then the companies evidence was lodged he says and they dropped him.

Shame on unite! And this is how you will increase your membership? ? ? Naïve and clueless

My immediate question would be one of timing.
When was he sacked and when did he become a member of the union?

manic-merc:
My mate has just been stiffed by Unite, he was going to tribunal for unfair dismissal and with less than a week to go before the tribunal, Unite claims he hasn’t been a member long enough to be represented!
They made a huge fuss of him, promised him the earth and how they would bring the company to its knees, even told him not to take full time work in the interim to make his claim look better! Then the companies evidence was lodged he says and they dropped him.

Shame on unite! And this is how you will increase your membership? ? ? Naïve and clueless

Not naive and clueless just down and out after almost 40 years of the working classes being told that unions aren’t in their best interests and only the Thatcherite way will make the country rich.

del949:
My immediate question would be one of timing.
When was he sacked and when did he become a member of the union?

There was a time when a sacking was met by strike action first then ask questions about how to settle the issues later.

manic-merc:
My mate has just been stiffed by Unite, he was going to tribunal for unfair dismissal and with less than a week to go before the tribunal, Unite claims he hasn’t been a member long enough to be represented!
They made a huge fuss of him, promised him the earth and how they would bring the company to its knees, even told him not to take full time work in the interim to make his claim look better! Then the companies evidence was lodged he says and they dropped him.

Shame on unite! And this is how you will increase your membership? ? ? Naïve and clueless

Nothing to stop him doing it himself, if only 1 week away all the paperwork must be done. When in court the judge will help him with anything he’s not sure off and stop the other side picking on him.

Nothing to stop him doing it himself, if only 1 week away all the paperwork must be done. When in court the judge will help him with anything he’s not sure off and stop the other side picking on him.

nothing at all to stop him…if he has the money to go through with it. It’s not free or cheap anymore and even if you win there is no guarantee that any costs will be refunded to you.

At a guess though this is down to one of two possibilites
1 that he didn’t join the union untill the [zb] hit the fan
2 that he didn’t give the union the true full facts and when they saw the bosses evidence they realised it couldn’t be won
In the case of “2” they would , I am sure have said that.
So, I’m guessing at “1”

Why will he need to pay, if only 1 week from tribunal all the paperwork will have been done months ago it’s only new cases that have to pay before you start a case