· financial penalties to be introduced on employers who breach employment rights, payable to the Exchequer, subject to a discretion exercisable by Employment Judges · a fundamental review of employment tribunal rules of procedure, to be led by Underhill J (who steps down as President of the EAT at the end of next month), to include changes to costs and deposit orders · Employment Judges to sit alone in unfair dismissal cases · CRB checks to be portable, so no need for a fresh application when moving jobs · maternity and paternity leave to be 'modernised', with emphasis on greater involvement for fathers The government has said it is still looking at the option of compensated, no-fault dismissals for micro-businesses (but it is not publishing any proposals at this time, it remaining a controversial suggestion raised in the Beecroft Report). According to an article in the Financial Times published before Vince Cable's speech, the government intends to call for evidence on the implications of no-fault dismissals for micro-businesses. 21 December 2011 The aim of the proposals in this consultation is to reduce the taxpayer subsidy of tribunals by transferring some of the cost to those who use the service, while protecting access to justice for the most vulnerable. Bringing a claim or an appeal to the employment tribunal or the Employment Appeal Tribunal is currently free of charge with the full cost of running the tribunals being met by the taxpayer (currently £84m per year). The consultation puts forward two options for consideration: · Option 1: an initial fee of between £150-£250 for a claimant to begin a claim, with an additional fee of between £250-£1250 if the claim goes to a hearing, with no limit to the maximum award; or · Option 2: a single fee of between £200-£600 – but this would limit the maximum award to £30,000 – with the option of an additional fee of £1,750 for those who seek awards above this amount. In both options the tribunal would be given the power to order the unsuccessful party to reimburse fees paid by the successful party. Many applications do not result in a full hearing or are settled out of court. Both parties spend time and money preparing for formal legal proceedings when around 80 per cent of applications made do not result in a full hearing. The fee proposals, as well as reducing the cost to the taxpayer, aim to encourage both sides to consider carefully the strength of their case and whether they could resolve the matter outside the tribunal - saving time and money and reducing the emotional cost that tribunal proceedings can bring. There were 218,100 claims to Employment Tribunals in 2010-11, a 44 per cent increase on 2008-09. The cost to the taxpayer rose from £77.8m to £84m over the same period. Introducing fees will bring employment tribunals into line with civil courts where claimants already pay a fee to use the service. Just like in civil courts the Government will also continue to fund a system of fee waivers for those who cannot afford to pay. The Government will continue to fund the cost of ACAS, which helps people in employment disputes reach agreement without the need for legal proceedings, and is free to users. CONSULTATION ON INTRODUCING FEES IN EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
CIPP Policy News Journal
09/10/2012, Page 214 of 234
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker