Review of Employment Tribunals to reduce spurious claims

The ARC's campaign is to change the rules to place an emphasis either on pre issue rejection of spurious claims, or early strike out by the Employment Tribunal.

Employers face a dilemma when a claim is made to an Employment Tribunal or potential claim is threatened. Many choose to pay out even if the claim is entirely spurious, because it avoids wasted time and effort, and it is cheaper to do so. Some may pay out to avoid  morale issues in the workforce, others to retain commercial relationships, for example between agencies supplying the worker concerned and the hirer.

According to Employment Tribunal Statistics, only in 0.9% of tribunal hearing is a costs award made against a loosing claimant, and even then costs awarded often do not match those incurred, leaving the Respondent employer in a highly unfair position.

The most recent example (early 2010) of this has been the widely reported. Numerous claims had been made by a certain individual against multiple hirers and agencies on the basis of alleged age discrimination. It was reported that some respondents had paid out, whilst others were successful in dismissing the claim but only after proceedings had been issued, and at a cost. The individual  appears to be running a business of making claims from his back room, yet how can this morally be right and permissable?

This issue has been investigated by the ARC which believes that the rules should be adjusted to limit the number of spurious claims and put employers on a more equal and fairer footing. An effective change could save employers millions of pounds every year.

The ARC held a networking meeting on this issue on 27th May 2010 (see report), and is addressing the issue with Government.