Fighting with the wind: claimants' experiences and perceptions of the Employment Tribunal

Nicole Busby, Morag McDermont

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The conceptualisation of access to justice in the Employment Tribunal (ET) as a public benefit essential for the realisation of the rule of law has recently been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court’s judgment in R v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51. However, reforms to the law and policy framework in recent years have been framed by Government as providing a necessary shift away from the use of full hearings due to the costs incurred by both the public and business. This article reports on the findings of research which tracked workers with ET claims who could not afford to pay for legal advice and representation. Their experiences and perceptions shed valuable light on the operation of the ET system. Many claimants were left dissatisfied, in particular those whose cases did not make it to full hearing. The data identify a range of barriers to justice, which impact on the ability of individuals to advance their claims and to enforce remedies. The article considers the use of ‘worker vulnerability’ in this context and the different interpretations applied by policy-makers. With reference to the research findings, we argue that vulnerability is universal and that, to counter it, the State has a central role to play in building individual and institutional resilience. We conclude by calling for the need to reclaim the concept of access to the civil justice system as a public good, capable of transcending private interests and providing fundamental protections against worker exploitation.
LanguageEnglish
Number of pages40
JournalIndustrial Law Journal
Early online date17 Aug 2019
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 17 Aug 2019

Fingerprint

justice
worker
vulnerability
legal advice
employment system
judgment or sentence
public benefits
experience
constitutional state
resilience
remedies
Supreme Court
exploitation
reform
interpretation
Law
ability
costs

Keywords

  • Employment Tribunal
  • civil justice system
  • access to justice
  • vulnerability
  • Taylor Review

Cite this

@article{fb370172cb8a41be8d20f97b81fd0d6b,
title = "Fighting with the wind: claimants' experiences and perceptions of the Employment Tribunal",
abstract = "The conceptualisation of access to justice in the Employment Tribunal (ET) as a public benefit essential for the realisation of the rule of law has recently been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court’s judgment in R v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51. However, reforms to the law and policy framework in recent years have been framed by Government as providing a necessary shift away from the use of full hearings due to the costs incurred by both the public and business. This article reports on the findings of research which tracked workers with ET claims who could not afford to pay for legal advice and representation. Their experiences and perceptions shed valuable light on the operation of the ET system. Many claimants were left dissatisfied, in particular those whose cases did not make it to full hearing. The data identify a range of barriers to justice, which impact on the ability of individuals to advance their claims and to enforce remedies. The article considers the use of ‘worker vulnerability’ in this context and the different interpretations applied by policy-makers. With reference to the research findings, we argue that vulnerability is universal and that, to counter it, the State has a central role to play in building individual and institutional resilience. We conclude by calling for the need to reclaim the concept of access to the civil justice system as a public good, capable of transcending private interests and providing fundamental protections against worker exploitation.",
keywords = "Employment Tribunal, civil justice system, access to justice, vulnerability, Taylor Review",
author = "Nicole Busby and Morag McDermont",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
day = "17",
doi = "10.1093/indlaw/dwz018",
language = "English",
journal = "Industrial Law Journal",
issn = "0305-9332",

}

Fighting with the wind : claimants' experiences and perceptions of the Employment Tribunal. / Busby, Nicole; McDermont, Morag.

In: Industrial Law Journal, 17.08.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Fighting with the wind

T2 - Industrial Law Journal

AU - Busby, Nicole

AU - McDermont, Morag

PY - 2019/8/17

Y1 - 2019/8/17

N2 - The conceptualisation of access to justice in the Employment Tribunal (ET) as a public benefit essential for the realisation of the rule of law has recently been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court’s judgment in R v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51. However, reforms to the law and policy framework in recent years have been framed by Government as providing a necessary shift away from the use of full hearings due to the costs incurred by both the public and business. This article reports on the findings of research which tracked workers with ET claims who could not afford to pay for legal advice and representation. Their experiences and perceptions shed valuable light on the operation of the ET system. Many claimants were left dissatisfied, in particular those whose cases did not make it to full hearing. The data identify a range of barriers to justice, which impact on the ability of individuals to advance their claims and to enforce remedies. The article considers the use of ‘worker vulnerability’ in this context and the different interpretations applied by policy-makers. With reference to the research findings, we argue that vulnerability is universal and that, to counter it, the State has a central role to play in building individual and institutional resilience. We conclude by calling for the need to reclaim the concept of access to the civil justice system as a public good, capable of transcending private interests and providing fundamental protections against worker exploitation.

AB - The conceptualisation of access to justice in the Employment Tribunal (ET) as a public benefit essential for the realisation of the rule of law has recently been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court’s judgment in R v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51. However, reforms to the law and policy framework in recent years have been framed by Government as providing a necessary shift away from the use of full hearings due to the costs incurred by both the public and business. This article reports on the findings of research which tracked workers with ET claims who could not afford to pay for legal advice and representation. Their experiences and perceptions shed valuable light on the operation of the ET system. Many claimants were left dissatisfied, in particular those whose cases did not make it to full hearing. The data identify a range of barriers to justice, which impact on the ability of individuals to advance their claims and to enforce remedies. The article considers the use of ‘worker vulnerability’ in this context and the different interpretations applied by policy-makers. With reference to the research findings, we argue that vulnerability is universal and that, to counter it, the State has a central role to play in building individual and institutional resilience. We conclude by calling for the need to reclaim the concept of access to the civil justice system as a public good, capable of transcending private interests and providing fundamental protections against worker exploitation.

KW - Employment Tribunal

KW - civil justice system

KW - access to justice

KW - vulnerability

KW - Taylor Review

U2 - 10.1093/indlaw/dwz018

DO - 10.1093/indlaw/dwz018

M3 - Article

JO - Industrial Law Journal

JF - Industrial Law Journal

SN - 0305-9332

ER -