Employment Tribunal Fees Unlawful

[WTFH]

If it's breaking news I tend to look at the Beeb, Sky etc first.

I think he was referring to the spelling in the title (which has now been corrected)

[SueEllen]

I think he was referring to the spelling in the title (which has now been corrected)

I've just done another one...

[administrator]

Needed to be done in light of the statistics, good result.

[WTFH]

I've just done another one...

Fixed that one too.

Although milk being in human would imply that it has been drunk, so is perfectly acceptable.

[vetran]

I don't find ties or suits sexy.

However some people involved in deciding uniform policies have warped ideas of what both men and women should dress like.

Mrs V likes me Suited & Booted. Working from home has ruined my sex life! - joking !

[chopper]

It was a nasty idea and saved sod all. It has however caused a 70% drop in cases.

What was the ratio of successful to unsuccessful cases before and after 2013?

Back in the day, when I employed people, I employed one saleswoman who sold sod all. So I closed my sales department down and made her redundant. And she took me to the employment tribunal with a whole long list of frivolous tulipe in her claim, including sex discrimination. (which she later withdrew). Her 'unfair dismissal' claim was obvious that her meaning of 'unfair' was not the same as the one the ET would use.

Eventually, having spent thousands on unrecoverable legal fees, she realised she didn't have a case and agreed to settle for £500 which worked out cheaper than my day in court (which would have been successful) and so we settled rather than go for the pyrrhic victory. She got £500 she didn't deserve, I got to stop worrying about it.

(As she'd had no formal advice on this, she forgot to request a good reference as part of the settlement. Which meant I could be truthful when I got a subsequent reference request).

She would have more likely thought twice if she'd had to pay for the ET1 submission rather than being able to make a cost free vindictive submission.

[BR14]

If it's breaking news I tend to look at the Beeb, Sky etc first.

i was referring to the misspelt header <now corrected by overzealous moderators>
sorry

[vetran]

What was the ratio of successful to unsuccessful cases before and after 2013?

Back in the day, when I employed people, I employed one saleswoman who sold sod all. So I closed my sales department down and made her redundant. And she took me to the employment tribunal with a whole long list of frivolous tulipe in her claim, including sex discrimination. (which she later withdrew). Her 'unfair dismissal' claim was obvious that her meaning of 'unfair' was not the same as the one the ET would use.

Eventually, having spent thousands on unrecoverable legal fees, she realised she didn't have a case and agreed to settle for £500 which worked out cheaper than my day in court (which would have been successful) and so we settled rather than go for the pyrrhic victory. She got £500 she didn't deserve, I got to stop worrying about it.

(As she'd had no formal advice on this, she forgot to request a good reference as part of the settlement. Which meant I could be truthful when I got a subsequent reference request).

She would have more likely thought twice if she'd had to pay for the ET1 submission rather than being able to make a cost free vindictive submission.

so an argument for speeding it up with a smoother process not making it chargeable.

[darmstadt]

Needed to be done in light of the statistics, good result.

Unless you're a Brexiter Tory donor with a seventies haircut: I'm Fuming Employment Tribunal Ruling - The Supreme Court Have Got It Wrong! :: Pimlico Plumbers

Pimlico Plumbers, which has donated more than £48,000 to the Conservative party in the last two years, lost a separate case earlier this year against a plumber who challenged the company’s view that he was self-employed at an employment tribunal.
Mullins told the radio programme that the scrapping of fees for employment tribunals was a “ridiculous, stupid, dangerous and irrational decision” and would lead to “malicious” claims from employees.

From the ruling:

[radish2008]

What was the ratio of successful to unsuccessful cases before and after 2013?

Back in the day, when I employed people, I employed one saleswoman who sold sod all. So I closed my sales department down and made her redundant. And she took me to the employment tribunal with a whole long list of frivolous tulipe in her claim, including sex discrimination. (which she later withdrew). Her 'unfair dismissal' claim was obvious that her meaning of 'unfair' was not the same as the one the ET would use.

Eventually, having spent thousands on unrecoverable legal fees, she realised she didn't have a case and agreed to settle for £500 which worked out cheaper than my day in court (which would have been successful) and so we settled rather than go for the pyrrhic victory. She got £500 she didn't deserve, I got to stop worrying about it.

(As she'd had no formal advice on this, she forgot to request a good reference as part of the settlement. Which meant I could be truthful when I got a subsequent reference request).

She would have more likely thought twice if she'd had to pay for the ET1 submission rather than being able to make a cost free vindictive submission.

One that she won.

The reason fees were introduced was because businesses lobbied for it. If it means that one person benefits from having their voice heard then they are a good thing.