Employment Tribunals

What are employment tribunals?

• They work alongside the court system

• People must use employment tribunals for settling employment disputes

How do Employment Tribunals operate?

• They operate independently from other tribunals

• Governed by their own legislation

• Make decision in legal disputes regarding employment law

How were employment tribunals created?

• Created by the Industrial Training Act 1964.

• Aimed to improve industrial relations

• To provide an informal, quick and cheap route to resolve quickly.

Structure of Employment Tribunals:

• Nowadays governed by the Employment Tribunal Regulations 2013

• Tribunals consist of: A chairperson (lawyer of 7 years standing), An individual nominated by the employer’s association and another by a TUC union.

• They are independent panels who make legally binding decisions.

• Parties are encourage to mediate through ACAS beforehand

How do Employment Tribunals work?

• Claimant completes an ET1 form to outline the claim’s details

• Tribunal receives claim and sends an ET3 form to respondent who completes it and returns counter arguments to Tribunal.

• A date is fixed for the hearing.

• The two parties, their representatives plus any witnesses will attend the hearing.

What happens upon the hearing?

• C will begin the case

• Witnesses will be called and sworn in then asked question by C.

• They will then be cross-examined by R or the judge.

• The Tribunal will then adjourn to consider its decision following the submissions.

• The Tribunal will give its decision and remedy

How can these be appealed?

• An appeal can be made to the Employment Appeal Tribunal

• It must have a legal point of merit to warrant an appeal

• Decisions of the EAT can be appealed to the High Court, then to the CA and the SC.

Examples of recent Tribunal cases: (Learn 2-3)

1. C, worked for a curry supplier was told he did not understand curry recipes because he was white = race discrimination C succeeded

2. C, disabled worker, claimed against M&S for delaying him a lift key so that he could use toilets

3. Uber drivers deemed to be workers, not self-employed, thus entitled to employment rights

Advantages of Employment Tribunals:

• COST - No fees are charged for making a medical claim. Each party pays its own costs. Losing party does not pay for winners costs.

• INFORMALITY - The chairperson does not wear an official outfit. There are no court formalities. Rules of evidence are not observed

• EXPERTISE - Chairperson and representatives of parties are experts in employment law. Chairperson will either be a judge or experienced lawyer. Lay members have practical experience in business. C can seek advice from ACAS councillors.

• JUDICIAL MEDIATION - C’s can have cases heard in private by an employment-specialist judge, rather than a full formal hearing with lawyers. This is cheaper and quicker. Means that the e/ee may not lose his job or not have relationships affected as it is done in private.

Disadvantages of Employment Tribunals:

• LACK OF PUBLIC FUNDING - No legal funding which disadvantages e/ee’s facing well-funded businesses who can pay for lawyers. This is worse if the e/ee has lost his job. This undermines purpose of the tribunals, to assist the most disadvantaged. Awards made by Tribunals can be disappointing unless C has had many years of service.

• FORMALITY - Because of the Franks Committee Report, the chairperson must be legally qualified and the tribunals must be chaired by a judge. This has lead to more formality as it has become similar to a court procedure. That has increased with the increased use of lawyers.

• DELAY - Increase in employment cases means that delays are common. Delays can now last years with employment law becoming more complex and practical.

• SUCCESS RATE - 20% settled by ACAS, 14% settled by Employment Tribunals with half in favour of C and half in favour of R. 8% of cases are struck-out.

• SETTLEMENTS - Successful claimants are often disappointed by size of compensation awarded. These can be modest without an extended period of employment with e/er. Cases that become acrimonious means that the e/ee and e/er relationship is permanently broken.