العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
EspañolEMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL
(Redirected from Industrial tribunal)
'Employment Tribunals' are inferior courts in Great Britain which have statutory jurisdiction to hear many kinds of disputes between employers and employees. The most common disputes being concerned with unfair dismissal and discrimination.
Employment Tribunals were created as 'Industrial Tribunals' by the Industrial Training Act 1964.
Industrial Tribunals were judicial bodies consisting of a lawyer (the chairman), an individual nominated by an employer association, and another by the TUC or TUC-affiliated union. These independent panels heard and made legally binding rulings in relation to employment law disputes. Under the Employment Rights (Dispute Resolution) Act 1998, their name was changed to "Employment Tribunals" from 1 August 1998.[1]. Employment Tribunals continue to perform the same function as the Industrial Tribunals.
Employment Tribunals are constituted and operate according to statutory rules issued by Parliament. The rules currently in operation are:-
:• The Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 SI 1861/2004s
:• The Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) (Amendment) Regulations SI 2351/2004
:• The Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) (Amendment) (No.2) Regulations 2005 SI 1865/2005
These rules set out the tribunals' main objectives and procedures, and matters such as time limits for making a claim, and dealing with requests for reviews and appeals.
The time limit for making a claim is typically 3 months from the date of the act complained of, but the limit can be extended to six months where an employee complains first to the employer, even after employment has been terminated. NB The rules concerning time limits are complex; early advice is recommended.
Claims are normally initiated by individuals, and normally responded to by employers (or former employers) or trade unions. Thus the terms "claimant" and "respondent" are used to describe the parties involved in tribunal proceedings. Normally each party pays its own costs. Tribunals will order one party to pay the other party's costs in exceptional circumstances, where it is claimed that one party has claimed vexatiously. However there is a conflict of interest: the tribunal may also want to reduce appeals against their own judgements.
Tribunals are designed to be informal and to encourage parties to represent themselves. There are no special clothes or complex civil procedure rules as at a county court; the buildings are mundane. However, a common complaint is that this makes them more formal in the sense that parties need to guess when to speak, where to sit, and how much they are allowed to question the chair's directions. [1] For example, advice workers from Advice Services Alliance or Citizens Advice Bureau will generally not represent clients at Tribunals because of their complexity. The tribunals service produce an expensive CD to demonstrate what a full trubunal is like.[2] Short excepts - about conciliation - are available on the ACAS website.
Cases are first heard at a "pre hearing review" by a government appointed chair acting alone as in Diplock courts. The chair also responds to letters and emails from each side asking that she requests documents from the other; there is no general right of each side to see the others papers, and chairs may simply refuse or ignore requests.
At the next stage there is a panel of three people – a legally qualified chairperson, and two ‘lay members’. The lay members use their employment experience in judging the facts. Many cases revolve around whether procedures were followed according to the law: under the Polki decision, a quick and easy win can be had by claiming that a sacking was fair but procedurally flawed. Discussions of sacking procedure can be arcane. During the full hearing, chairs are under more pressure to follow the rules of procedure and ensure "fairness", for example in explaining the law to one party and perhaps not to another. Many lawyers advise litigents that there is no way of predicting what this will mean in practice, and that it is better to settle, even with an ex employee or employer who could otherwise be exposed as crooked. Tribunals are also used to choosing which side to believe in many cases of discrimination and dismissal. Clients have been advised that they make this decision early-on, and that it is influenced by presentation of the case as well as content.
One of the lay members should have experience from the employer's side of disputes and the other from the Trade Union movement. These may not be the same, as many complaints to the tribunal involve a history of inaction by recognised unions and final appointment of a conditional fee lawyer at the last minute before the case starts. Also, the employer's side my be represented by a Human Resources worker from a large institution, who has to work hard to understand informal and small-scale employment. Sometimes the chairperson sits on their own again (for example, to hear any legal arguments).
A party may apply to the tribunal requesting a review of its own decision. A tribunal may also review its decision of its own motion. Decisions can be reviewed where an error is relatively minor, eg a clerical error.
Where a party believes the tribunal has misapplied the law or acted perversely, the review process is inappropriate and the party must appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal. For example the right of a Chair to strike-out all or part of a claim while sitting alone in a pre-hearing review has been described by the Appeals tribunal as a "draconian power", but is regularly used. Chairs also have the right to warn parties that costs may be found against if they appeal or continue their case, or to ask for a deposit towards such costs. As in other courts, the risk of costs being found against may deter genuine claimants who represent themselves, as well as neusance claimants. This second draconian power restricts control of the first.
Parties are expected to comply with strictly enforced time limits when applying for a Review or Appeal. The appeals tribunal itself has ignored its duty to hear appeals about time limits, assuming in a kind of nanny-state spirit that the tribunal members had all the facts before them on the day and are incapable of prejudice or bias.
Dissatisfaction with the Tribunal service is often focussed on representatives, rather than tribunal members [3], but there are complaints that modern Chairs and panels are biased in favour of professional lawyers and against human resources workers for example[[4]]. A common complaint is that the system favours brief legal argument and settlement out of court for small amounts of money, while the motive for going to a tribunal is often more like the motive of a victim in a criminal court: to see injustice exposed and not repeated.[5].
The Department of Constitutional Affairs operates the Employment Tribunals Service, which is a branch of the UK's Tribunals Service. Appointments are made by Charles Falconer, Baron Falconer of Thoroton, the Prime Minister's ex-flatmate and proponent of the Millenium Dome. Types of disputes commonly heard by Employment Tribunals include claims connected with unfair dismissal, redundancy payments and discrimination. The Employment Tribunal Service maintains a list of claims in which tribunals have jurisdiction. Tribunal officers are foribidden to advise before complaint about a Tribunal chair or wing member, but complaints can be made to the regional chair and they will give the name and address. MPs may also advise on how best to complain about a biassed or incompetant chair.
The Employment Tribunals Service published its Annual Report and Accounts for 2005-06 in July 2006 [6], which included these key points:
::• In 05/06, there were 115,039 claims accepted, compared with 86,181 in 04/05 and 115,042 in 03/04.
::• 18% of claims were successful at a full hearing in 05/06; the remainder were either settled, withdrawn, unsuccessful or otherwise disposed of.
::• The median award for unfair dismissal was £4.228; the average award was £8,679.
::• The median award for discrimination was between £5,546 and £9,021 (depending on the type of discrimination).
::• Costs were awarded against claimants in 148 cases, and against respondents in 432 cases. The median costs award was £1,136.
::• 867 Employment Tribunal decisions were appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal. Of those, 191 were withdrawn, 378 were dismissed and the remaining 298 appeals were allowed.
★ Employment law
★ The Employment Tribunals home page, with access to full rules, statistics, jurisdiction lists and procedures, plus online application and response forms
★ Disclaw Publishing has a free to use online database concerning British Employment Law including useful "basic position" paragraphs. Subscribers get more detail.
★ Bailii.org.uk provides free access to case law of appeal courts: a law in itself to the junior courts and in some cases written like a law. This and the free part of Emplaw can be used as an up-to-date free legal source.
★ Which? Legal Service a cheap telephone advice line for first clarifications of employment, county court and other legal problems. Quarterly subscription covers advice about previous events. All advice is by phone; documents cannot be faxed for comment.
★ The Co-Operative joining page The Co-operative offers a legal advice line to members, often as a free special offer. Joining is free and may involve a dividend if you use participating services. Advice about events that happened before joining the co-op is covered. All advice is by phone; documents cannot be faxed for comment.
★ Andrea Adams Trust interactive flow chart for narrowing-down legal claims, similar to the one on Iambeingfired.com, a selection site for no-win no-fee lawyers. Andrea Adams Trust can also advise employers how to reduce bullying by their middle managers in pursuit of performance targets or to resolve their own personal insecurities.
★ Workbully Support yahoo group's links page lists other legal services.
1. s.1(1) Employment Rights (Dispute Resolution) Act 1998
'Employment Tribunals' are inferior courts in Great Britain which have statutory jurisdiction to hear many kinds of disputes between employers and employees. The most common disputes being concerned with unfair dismissal and discrimination.
| Contents |
| History |
| Procedure |
| Hearings |
| Appeals |
| Administration |
| Statistics |
| See also |
| External links |
| References |
History
Employment Tribunals were created as 'Industrial Tribunals' by the Industrial Training Act 1964.
Industrial Tribunals were judicial bodies consisting of a lawyer (the chairman), an individual nominated by an employer association, and another by the TUC or TUC-affiliated union. These independent panels heard and made legally binding rulings in relation to employment law disputes. Under the Employment Rights (Dispute Resolution) Act 1998, their name was changed to "Employment Tribunals" from 1 August 1998.[1]. Employment Tribunals continue to perform the same function as the Industrial Tribunals.
Procedure
Employment Tribunals are constituted and operate according to statutory rules issued by Parliament. The rules currently in operation are:-
:• The Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 SI 1861/2004s
:• The Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) (Amendment) Regulations SI 2351/2004
:• The Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) (Amendment) (No.2) Regulations 2005 SI 1865/2005
These rules set out the tribunals' main objectives and procedures, and matters such as time limits for making a claim, and dealing with requests for reviews and appeals.
The time limit for making a claim is typically 3 months from the date of the act complained of, but the limit can be extended to six months where an employee complains first to the employer, even after employment has been terminated. NB The rules concerning time limits are complex; early advice is recommended.
Claims are normally initiated by individuals, and normally responded to by employers (or former employers) or trade unions. Thus the terms "claimant" and "respondent" are used to describe the parties involved in tribunal proceedings. Normally each party pays its own costs. Tribunals will order one party to pay the other party's costs in exceptional circumstances, where it is claimed that one party has claimed vexatiously. However there is a conflict of interest: the tribunal may also want to reduce appeals against their own judgements.
Tribunals are designed to be informal and to encourage parties to represent themselves. There are no special clothes or complex civil procedure rules as at a county court; the buildings are mundane. However, a common complaint is that this makes them more formal in the sense that parties need to guess when to speak, where to sit, and how much they are allowed to question the chair's directions. [1] For example, advice workers from Advice Services Alliance or Citizens Advice Bureau will generally not represent clients at Tribunals because of their complexity. The tribunals service produce an expensive CD to demonstrate what a full trubunal is like.[2] Short excepts - about conciliation - are available on the ACAS website.
Hearings
Cases are first heard at a "pre hearing review" by a government appointed chair acting alone as in Diplock courts. The chair also responds to letters and emails from each side asking that she requests documents from the other; there is no general right of each side to see the others papers, and chairs may simply refuse or ignore requests.
At the next stage there is a panel of three people – a legally qualified chairperson, and two ‘lay members’. The lay members use their employment experience in judging the facts. Many cases revolve around whether procedures were followed according to the law: under the Polki decision, a quick and easy win can be had by claiming that a sacking was fair but procedurally flawed. Discussions of sacking procedure can be arcane. During the full hearing, chairs are under more pressure to follow the rules of procedure and ensure "fairness", for example in explaining the law to one party and perhaps not to another. Many lawyers advise litigents that there is no way of predicting what this will mean in practice, and that it is better to settle, even with an ex employee or employer who could otherwise be exposed as crooked. Tribunals are also used to choosing which side to believe in many cases of discrimination and dismissal. Clients have been advised that they make this decision early-on, and that it is influenced by presentation of the case as well as content.
One of the lay members should have experience from the employer's side of disputes and the other from the Trade Union movement. These may not be the same, as many complaints to the tribunal involve a history of inaction by recognised unions and final appointment of a conditional fee lawyer at the last minute before the case starts. Also, the employer's side my be represented by a Human Resources worker from a large institution, who has to work hard to understand informal and small-scale employment. Sometimes the chairperson sits on their own again (for example, to hear any legal arguments).
Appeals
A party may apply to the tribunal requesting a review of its own decision. A tribunal may also review its decision of its own motion. Decisions can be reviewed where an error is relatively minor, eg a clerical error.
Where a party believes the tribunal has misapplied the law or acted perversely, the review process is inappropriate and the party must appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal. For example the right of a Chair to strike-out all or part of a claim while sitting alone in a pre-hearing review has been described by the Appeals tribunal as a "draconian power", but is regularly used. Chairs also have the right to warn parties that costs may be found against if they appeal or continue their case, or to ask for a deposit towards such costs. As in other courts, the risk of costs being found against may deter genuine claimants who represent themselves, as well as neusance claimants. This second draconian power restricts control of the first.
Parties are expected to comply with strictly enforced time limits when applying for a Review or Appeal. The appeals tribunal itself has ignored its duty to hear appeals about time limits, assuming in a kind of nanny-state spirit that the tribunal members had all the facts before them on the day and are incapable of prejudice or bias.
Dissatisfaction with the Tribunal service is often focussed on representatives, rather than tribunal members [3], but there are complaints that modern Chairs and panels are biased in favour of professional lawyers and against human resources workers for example[[4]]. A common complaint is that the system favours brief legal argument and settlement out of court for small amounts of money, while the motive for going to a tribunal is often more like the motive of a victim in a criminal court: to see injustice exposed and not repeated.[5].
Administration
The Department of Constitutional Affairs operates the Employment Tribunals Service, which is a branch of the UK's Tribunals Service. Appointments are made by Charles Falconer, Baron Falconer of Thoroton, the Prime Minister's ex-flatmate and proponent of the Millenium Dome. Types of disputes commonly heard by Employment Tribunals include claims connected with unfair dismissal, redundancy payments and discrimination. The Employment Tribunal Service maintains a list of claims in which tribunals have jurisdiction. Tribunal officers are foribidden to advise before complaint about a Tribunal chair or wing member, but complaints can be made to the regional chair and they will give the name and address. MPs may also advise on how best to complain about a biassed or incompetant chair.
Statistics
The Employment Tribunals Service published its Annual Report and Accounts for 2005-06 in July 2006 [6], which included these key points:
::• In 05/06, there were 115,039 claims accepted, compared with 86,181 in 04/05 and 115,042 in 03/04.
::• 18% of claims were successful at a full hearing in 05/06; the remainder were either settled, withdrawn, unsuccessful or otherwise disposed of.
::• The median award for unfair dismissal was £4.228; the average award was £8,679.
::• The median award for discrimination was between £5,546 and £9,021 (depending on the type of discrimination).
::• Costs were awarded against claimants in 148 cases, and against respondents in 432 cases. The median costs award was £1,136.
::• 867 Employment Tribunal decisions were appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal. Of those, 191 were withdrawn, 378 were dismissed and the remaining 298 appeals were allowed.
See also
★ Employment law
External links
★ The Employment Tribunals home page, with access to full rules, statistics, jurisdiction lists and procedures, plus online application and response forms
★ Disclaw Publishing has a free to use online database concerning British Employment Law including useful "basic position" paragraphs. Subscribers get more detail.
★ Bailii.org.uk provides free access to case law of appeal courts: a law in itself to the junior courts and in some cases written like a law. This and the free part of Emplaw can be used as an up-to-date free legal source.
★ Which? Legal Service a cheap telephone advice line for first clarifications of employment, county court and other legal problems. Quarterly subscription covers advice about previous events. All advice is by phone; documents cannot be faxed for comment.
★ The Co-Operative joining page The Co-operative offers a legal advice line to members, often as a free special offer. Joining is free and may involve a dividend if you use participating services. Advice about events that happened before joining the co-op is covered. All advice is by phone; documents cannot be faxed for comment.
★ Andrea Adams Trust interactive flow chart for narrowing-down legal claims, similar to the one on Iambeingfired.com, a selection site for no-win no-fee lawyers. Andrea Adams Trust can also advise employers how to reduce bullying by their middle managers in pursuit of performance targets or to resolve their own personal insecurities.
★ Workbully Support yahoo group's links page lists other legal services.
References
1. s.1(1) Employment Rights (Dispute Resolution) Act 1998
This article provided by Wikipedia. To edit the contents of this article, click here for original source.
psst.. try this: add to faves
