The Government moves to limit workers' access to justice

Now is the time to act

    Helping You     About     Links     Contact     Site Info     HOME

• The qualifying period for unfair dismissal will rise from one to two years from 1st April 2012.
• Once that hurdle has been passed a worker will have to contend with a £250 charge for serving the ET1, followed by a
• £1,000 fee once the case is listed(more for cases claiming over £30,000).
• Osbourne said that the fees will not be charged for 'poor' claimants, and that these fees would be refunded if workers win their claims.
• Little credence should be given to this claim as even if the fees are refunded,which is not certain, they will probably then be deducted from any compensation awarded.

This government might not find it easy to role back much of the legislation protecting workers' rights as it often stems from EU directives. But the fear is that as with the stealthy yet increasing undermining of benefit entitlements (such as those for the disabled) this might be the beginning of a systematic legislative attack on workers' rights. Accordingly these new measures need to be fought against strongly before they even begin to be implemented.

The government is attempting to describe these provisions as necessary to prevent abuse of the employment tribunal system by vexatious litigants attempting to harm their employer. Yet this issue has already been comprehensively addressed (already unfairly as the powers are draconian)and tightened again in the 2004 Employment Tribunal Regulations so that workers who bring cases judged as without merit or vexatious workers are already at risk of costs of up to £10,000 being awarded against them (the costs are unlimited if the ET refers the assessment of costs to the County Court).

And even before a case begins a judge may strike out a case judged without merit at a pre-hearing. A £250 deposit may be asked for when a case is judged as 'weak' by the judge.

As there is no need for these new measures to weed out 'undeserving' cases, it remains to be answered as to just what agenda these measures by the Liberal-Conservative alliance serve? Could it be related to a more general attack on workers' rights such as watering down TUPE or reducing redundancy consultations from 100 to 30 days?

© 2011 Workrep