3. Employment
New Regulations, Rules and Procedures
1. We have reported in previous Annual Reports on how work was being taken forward by the Department of Trade and Industry to implement the recommendations of the Employment Tribunal System Taskforce, some of which were given effect through provisions in the Employment Act 2002. In last year's Report we discussed our response to consultation on the revised rules of procedure, the main thrust of which was that some of the rules remained excessively detailed and prescriptive.
2. We were subsequently consulted on proposals to streamline equal value tribunal procedures. These cases, which concern equal pay, can traditionally be complex and lengthy. The new rules for these cases were intended to streamline procedures in order to achieve a more efficient service and the delivery of swifter justice. The key reforms comprised:
- new powers for ET Presidents to appoint panels with specialist knowledge of equal value cases
- new, more user-friendly procedural rules
- early exchange of factual information between the parties to an appeal, with the requirement for each to produce a written statement of agreed facts
- better case management arrangements
- more effective use of independent experts on the ACAS panel
- reduction in the time spent on cross-examination through early disclosure of expert evidence and greater use of written questions.
3. We agreed that the rules appeared to be written in simpler language, although inevitably some degree of complexity still remained. Nevertheless, we thought that the effort to achieve greater simplification had been more successful than for the main procedural rules. We agreed that it seemed sensible to adopt the proposed three-stage process in all cases where an expert had been appointed, but enquired what the criteria would be for deciding whether or not to appoint an expert in any particular case or group of cases. We suggested that there might be occasions when it would be preferable to appoint an independent expert from the outset to assist the tribunal in identifying the salient facts and issues for consideration. We urged the use of special measures for dealing with appeals from vulnerable people who might need additional assistance, which we felt had been overlooked in the proposals. We also concurred that parties should be required to disclose at the earliest opportunity all the facts on which they intend to rely.
4. We were also consulted on drafts of the new tribunal claim and response forms. Again, we welcomed the underlying aim of making the forms more user-friendly, including the provision of additional information and guidance to assist tribunal users to present their claim in a more structured way. We made a number of detailed observations about the format and content of the new forms and, in broad terms, whilst we felt that greater simplicity had been achieved, we remained firmly of the view that many unassisted users would continue to find the process of making a claim difficult.
5. The new rules and procedures came into operation in October 2004 and we have not yet been able to gauge for ourselves how they are operating, and more particularly whether they are achieving the policy intention of simplifying the system. However, we are aware from a variety of sources that the inflexibility of the requirements of the new application forms is causing problems for some claimants. We were also disappointed to note that, because of administrative and technical difficulties, the new on-line claims completion facility had to be delayed by six months. We shall take a particular interest in this in the coming year.
6. The Employment Tribunal will be among the first wave of tribunals to transfer to the new Tribunals Service in April 2006. As with the other transferring tribunals, we will follow closely how this is being taken forward.
|