The policy report Employment tribunal claims - debunking the myths was authored by Eleanor Kirk at the University of Strathclyde, Professor Morag McDermont at the University of Bristol and Professor Nicole Busby at the University of Strathclyde.

 

Policy discourses surrounding the employment tribunal system, culminating in recent radical reforms by the Coalition Government, have been based upon a number of interrelated myths, centred on the notion that people are too quick to raise tribunal applications. Claimants have been vilified as ‘nuisance litigants’ who bring ‘weak and vexatious’ claims of

dubious merit which must be suppressed. The Government’s reforms include the imposition of fees and the extension of qualification for protection from unfair dismissal from one to two years. These changes have made it progressively more difficult to bring claims. Policy has been led by the assumption that many claims lack merit, based on the fact of a high volume of claims and the observation that many are unsuccessful, rather than any concrete evidence of the motives and experiences of claimants.

 

Research conducted by the Universities of Bristol and Strathclyde followed more than 150 workers as they attempted to seek justice for work-related grievances between late 2012 and the end of 2014. This research project is the first to provide longitudinal, qualitative data on experiences of the employment tribunal system, from the early formulation of problems into legal issues, through application to a tribunal, to hearing and beyond.

 

The research highlights that even before fees were brought in significant barriers to access to justice existed within the tribunal system and argues that the rationale behind their imposition was misplaced.

 

You can also read a related policy briefing.