We have blogged before (click here) about what we see as the serious restriction of access to justice
inflicted by the introduction in July last year of the new employment tribunal
fee regime.
It can cost £1200.00 to pursue an unfair dismissal claim to a hearing.
In theory, a system of “remission” exists so that fees can be waived if you cannot afford to pay them. In practice, fewer than 1 in 10 remission applications have been granted, and since capital is taken into account, any termination payment you have received if your employment has come to an end might automatically disqualify you from any help with the expensive fees.
The government was sure that fees would deter meritless claims – and business would reap the benefits.
3 months ago, the first set of statistics showing the effect of the introduction of fees suggests that tribunal cases had dropped by some 80%. In other words, compared to the same period a year before, only 1 in 5 cases was being presented in the new regime where fees have to be paid.
We wondered whether that was a “blip” – but it seems not.
The latest snapshot for a further 3 month period confirms that the drop in tribunal claims has been dramatic.
80% of claims made a year ago are no longer being presented.
Now, every practitioner will tell you that some tribunal claims were speculative. Some people lodged claims even in the face of advice from lawyers or unions that those claims were weak, and the old system meant that claims could be lodged at no cost to the claimant.
No one to my knowledge has ever seriously suggested that 80% of claims were without merit or purely speculative.
Indeed, we are now in a position where the number of claims being lodged has now dropped below the level of the number of claims that originally used to succeed.
So it has not just deterred speculative claimants.
We have deterred claimants with reasonably arguable cases.
Worse still, we have deterred claimants who, according to the old statistics, would have won their cases against their employers.
Access to justice has been denied. That was always going to be the case, but the dogmatic approach of government has meant – not for the first time – that the views of professionals and stake holders have been ignored once more.
For shame: what price are worker’s rights, if no one can afford to enforce them?
It can cost £1200.00 to pursue an unfair dismissal claim to a hearing.
In theory, a system of “remission” exists so that fees can be waived if you cannot afford to pay them. In practice, fewer than 1 in 10 remission applications have been granted, and since capital is taken into account, any termination payment you have received if your employment has come to an end might automatically disqualify you from any help with the expensive fees.
The government was sure that fees would deter meritless claims – and business would reap the benefits.
3 months ago, the first set of statistics showing the effect of the introduction of fees suggests that tribunal cases had dropped by some 80%. In other words, compared to the same period a year before, only 1 in 5 cases was being presented in the new regime where fees have to be paid.
We wondered whether that was a “blip” – but it seems not.
The latest snapshot for a further 3 month period confirms that the drop in tribunal claims has been dramatic.
80% of claims made a year ago are no longer being presented.
Now, every practitioner will tell you that some tribunal claims were speculative. Some people lodged claims even in the face of advice from lawyers or unions that those claims were weak, and the old system meant that claims could be lodged at no cost to the claimant.
No one to my knowledge has ever seriously suggested that 80% of claims were without merit or purely speculative.
Indeed, we are now in a position where the number of claims being lodged has now dropped below the level of the number of claims that originally used to succeed.
So it has not just deterred speculative claimants.
We have deterred claimants with reasonably arguable cases.
Worse still, we have deterred claimants who, according to the old statistics, would have won their cases against their employers.
Access to justice has been denied. That was always going to be the case, but the dogmatic approach of government has meant – not for the first time – that the views of professionals and stake holders have been ignored once more.
For shame: what price are worker’s rights, if no one can afford to enforce them?
Paul Scholey - Senior Partner
For further information on Employment Rights please visit our website or call 0033 3344 9603 and ask to speak with our Employment Rights team.
