DOCSLIB.ORG

Resolving Workplace Disputes: Government Response to the Consultation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Resolving Workplace Disputes: Government Response to the Consultation Resolving Workplace Disputes: Government response to the consultation NOVEMBER 2011 Resolving Workplace Disputes - Government Response to Consultation Contents Resolving Workplace Disputes - Government Response to Consultation ...................................... 3 FOREWORD ................................................................................................................................... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................. 6 General response ............................................................................................................................ 7 Responses to specific questions ..................................................................................................... 8 1. Mediation (Q 1–7) ................................................................................................................... 8 2. Compromise Agreements (Q. 8–11)....................................................................................... 8 3. Early conciliation (Q. 12-20).................................................................................................... 8 4. Modernising Tribunals (Q. 21-56) ........................................................................................... 9 5. Unfair Dismissal qualification period (Q. 57-60) ..................................................................... 9 6. Financial Penalties (Q. 61-62) ................................................................................................ 9 7. Formula for calculating award and payment limits (Q 63-64) ................................................. 9 8. Rapid Resolution................................................................................................................... 10 RESPONSES RECEIVED............................................................................................................. 11 ANALYSIS AND RESPONSE ....................................................................................................... 12 QUESTIONS 1-7: MEDIATION.................................................................................................. 12 Summary of Responses:........................................................................................................ 12 Government Response .......................................................................................................... 13 QUESTIONS 8-11: COMPROMISE AGREEMENTS ............................................................... 15 Summary of responses .......................................................................................................... 15 Government Response .......................................................................................................... 17 QUESTIONS 12-20: EARLY CONCILIATION .......................................................................... 19 Summary of responses .......................................................................................................... 19 Government Response .......................................................................................................... 21 QUESTIONS 21 – 33: CASE MANAGEMENT POWERS......................................................... 23 Summary of responses (see Annex B) .................................................................................. 23 Government Response .......................................................................................................... 24 QUESTIONS 34 – 44: FACILITATING SETTLEMENTS........................................................... 25 Summary of responses (see Annex B) .................................................................................. 25 Government Response .......................................................................................................... 27 QUESTIONS 45 – 56: WITNESS STATEMENTS BEING TAKEN AS READ, WITNESS EXPENSES, JUDGES SITTING ALONE AND LEGAL OFFICERS.......................................... 28 Summary of responses (see Annex B) .................................................................................. 28 Government Response .......................................................................................................... 29 Witness statements ................................................................................................................ 29 State-funded expenses .......................................................................................................... 30 Judges sitting alone................................................................................................................ 31 Legal officers .......................................................................................................................... 32 QUESTIONS 57-60: EXTENDING THE QUALIFICATION PERIOD FOR UNFAIR DISMISSAL ................................................................................................................................................... 32 Summary of responses .......................................................................................................... 32 Government Response .......................................................................................................... 33 QUESTIONS 61-62: FINANCIAL PENALTIES.......................................................................... 34 Summary of responses .......................................................................................................... 34 Government Response .......................................................................................................... 36 QUESTIONS 63-64: FORMULA FOR CALCULATING TRIBUNAL AWARDS AND STATUTORY REDUNDANCY PAYMENT LIMITS.................................................................... 37 Government Response .......................................................................................................... 38 WHAT HAPPENS NEXT ...............................................................................................................39 ANNEX A ....................................................................................................................................... 40 SUMMARY OF QUESTIONS .................................................................................................... 40 ANNEX B ....................................................................................................................................... 47 1 Resolving Workplace Disputes - Government Response to Consultation MODERNISING OUR TRIBUNALS - SCHEDULE OF QUESTIONS ........................................... 47 QUESTIONS 21 – 24: Strike out powers................................................................................... 47 QUESTIONS 25 – 29: Deposit powers...................................................................................... 48 QUESTIONS 30 – 33: Costs powers......................................................................................... 49 QUESTIONS 34 – 38: The ET1 form......................................................................................... 50 QUESTIONS 39 – 44 Calderbank-style settlement offers......................................................... 51 QUESTIONS 49 – 51: State-funded expenses.......................................................................... 53 QUESTIONS 52 – 54: Judges sitting alone............................................................................... 53 QUESTIONS 55 – 56: Legal officers ......................................................................................... 54 ANNEX C....................................................................................................................................... 55 Respondents to the RWD consultation included: ...................................................................... 55 2 Resolving Workplace Disputes - Government Response to Consultation Resolving Workplace Disputes - Government Response to Consultation FOREWORD Our vision is for an employment dispute resolution system that promotes the use of early dispute resolution as a means of dealing with workplace problems. The consultation “Resolving Workplace Disputes” set out our ideas, which focused on the need to tackle problems early, before they got to the tribunal stage. For it is clear that the system is not working as originally intended and is often not a positive experience for either employer or employee. Employers told us that successful reform could encourage them to take on more staff, contributing to economic growth. Evidence of the stress and outcomes for employees suggested reform could also be beneficial for workers. We are grateful to all those who responded to our reform ideas and set out here a number of important steps we now intend to take to make early dispute resolution more accessible to all. Firstly, our mediation initiatives, which we believe can help change the whole culture. We know, for example, that smaller businesses are proportionately more likely to find themselves the subject of employment tribunal claims, but are much less likely to have access to in-house HR expertise to help them deal with problems. We also know, from the responses to our consultation, that perceived cost is a barrier to using mediation. Making mediation more accessible and less costly for smaller businesses will provide an opportunity for those involved to deal with
Load more

Recommended publications
  • General Counsel Career Track an Eversheds Sutherland Research Report General Counsel Career Track an Eversheds Sutherland Research Report
    General Counsel Career Track An Eversheds Sutherland research report General Counsel Career Track An Eversheds Sutherland research report Contents Foreword 3 Introduction 4 Characteristics of existing General Counsel 5 What the GCs said: advice to succeed 8 The views of aspiring General Counsel 14 The way forward: some suggestions 17 In-house legal competencies framework 18 Profiles illustrating different in-house career paths 20 Acknowledgements 28 General Counsel Career Track An Eversheds Sutherland research report Foreword In the last twenty years the role of General Counsel has become more prevalent and at the same time, it has increased in influence and scope. Much has been written about this pivotal role - the independent voice on, or close to, a company’s board and yet very little has been written about how to reach what some may consider their ultimate career goal. As the role has expanded from managing a legal team As a former General Counsel I have long been an to encompassing secretariat, governance, risk, advocate for the position, recognising the great compliance and potentially a range of other central breadth and variety that the role offers and the functions, the experience and skills required to opportunity to become involved in a broad range of succeed have changed. Identifying the attributes of strategic and commercial activity. However, I have also some of the country’s most successful General witnessed highly competent in-house counsel Counsel will be helpful, but as the role expands to become too specialised either by sector or role and meet a changing work and regulatory environment, miss out on management positions by not being skills and attributes that have been valued and effective sufficiently prepared for their next promotion.
    [Show full text]
  • Law Firm of the Year Sponsored by Natwest
    John Cleland and Richard Foley (centre) with James Tsolakis of Natwest and Alex Novarese of Legal Business LAW FIRM OF THE YEAR SPONSORED BY NATWEST PINSENT MASONS John Cleland; Richard Foley PULLING AHEAD OF THE CHASING PACK underlying that was a three percentage-point increase in New leadership has added extra flair and bite to the story of profit margin. Pinsent Masons over the last 12 months, already one of the This financial performance wasn't a one-off. Over five fastest-growing UK-headquartered firms in our Global 100 years, turnover has grown by 70%, which compares more than report over the past five years. favourably with any other large national firm with regional heritage. The firm posted revenue of £362.4m in 2014/15, up 12% on The firm is well balanced: its infrastructure, advanced the prior year. As well as being one of only two firms in the manufacturing and technology and financial services sectors Legal Business 100 top 25 to post double-digit growth, this was each consistently account for around 20% of the firm's accompanied by a 15% increase in turnover in London and turnover, with the energy sector contributing some 12%. HIGHLY COMMENDED ALLEN & OVERY MISHCON DE REYA STEWARTS LAW Wim Dejonghe Kevin Gold John Cahill The standout performer of London’s In 2015, Mishcon de Reya exceeded Demonstrating the rising stock of big four over the last five years, A&O its financial target of £100m revenue specialist practices in the UK top 100, saw revenue growth of 4% to £1.28bn a year ahead of schedule – the fifth disputes-only player Stewarts Law was in 2014/15, while profits per equity consecutive year that it has beaten one of the strongest performers overall partner came in at £1.21m, a rise of 8%.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Firms Still Need to Be Careful in Good Markets 21St September 2015 Authors: Tony Williams; Steve Cottee
    Beware of the upturn – why firms still need to be careful in good markets 21st September 2015 Authors: Tony Williams; Steve Cottee As the results for 2014-15 show a sustained if gradual improvement in law firms financial performance, together with the news of Gateley's successful IPO it is tempting to assume that the worst is now behind law firms after a gruelling period following the financial crisis. However, law firms need to be wary of the upturn and ensure that their firm is well placed to weather the storms that will buffet the legal market for many years to come. In our view there are six factors that law firms need to pay particular attention to if they are going to survive and thrive over the next few years. Cash Firms have increased their long term debt (over one year) from £5.75bn in 2010 to £7.35bn in 2014. Conversely short term debt, mostly overdrafts, has reduced from £2.4bn in 2011 to £1.8bn in 2014. Firms have however received a very significant cash infusion by way of the estimated £1bn of capital injected by fixed share partners to meet the recent requirements of HMRC. Banks still see law firms as a relatively good risk but a few high profile failures may see credit committees becoming far less accommodating and the cost of facilities rise. Crucially the capital injection from fixed share partners many firms benefitted from last year will not be available this year, at a time when arguably there will be an even greater need for cash than before.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2004-2005: Rankings & Listings
    Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2004-2005: Rankings & Listings Capital Markets Foreign firms China 1. Allen & Overy LLP Baker & McKenzie Clifford Chance LLP Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Herbert Smith Linklaters Shearman & Sterling LLP Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP Sullivan & Cromwell LLP 2. Davis Polk & Wardwell Deacons Debevoise & Plimpton LLP Johnson Stokes & Master Jones Day Latham & Watkins LLP Morrison & Foerster O’Melveny & Myers LLP Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP Richards Butler Simmons & Simmons White & Case LLP 3. Allens Arthur Robinson Gallant Y.T.Ho & Co Gide Loyrette Nouel Kaye Scholer LLP Livasiri & Co Lovells Mallesons Stephen Jaques Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP Woo, Kwan, Lee & Lo Firms are listed A-Z in tiers which are ranked in order of priority Source: Legal 500 Asia Pacific, 2004/2005 edition. Latham & Watkins operates as a limited liability partnership worldwide with an affiliate in the United Kingdom and Italy, where the practice is conducted through an affiliated multinational partnership. © Copyright 2005 Latham & Watkins. All Rights Reserved. Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2004-2005: Rankings & Listings Squire, Sanders & Dempsey LLP Infrastructure and Project Stephenson Harwood Woo, Kwan, Lee & Lo Finance Firms are listed A-Z in tiers which are ranked in order of Foreign firms priority China 1. Latham & Watkins LLP is a major name Allen & Overy LLP in projects worldwide, and has extensive Baker & McKenzie experience on significant projects in China Clifford Chance LLP from its Hong Kong office. The firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer advised the PRC and the international Gide Loyrette Nouel bank lenders on the US $4.3bn Nanhai Herbert Smith Petrochemical complex.
    [Show full text]
  • Intelligence Report
    Foreign law firms Intelligence report The new legal architects In the wake of the financial storm, which international law firms are taking the lead in designing and executing India’s cross-border transactions? George W Russell investigates June 2010 India Business Law Journal 33 Intelligence report Foreign law firms aw firms working on India deals have managed “Tariffs have to be more competitive and arrangements a collective sigh of relief. The outlook for India- have to be more creative, such as blended rates, maxi- related legal work is brighter than it has ever mum lump sum fees and success fees,” says Isabelle Lbeen since the global financial downturn took Roux-Chenu, director and group general counsel at hold late in 2008. “India related work has increased at a Capgemini in Paris. faster pace over the last year as India was not as badly affected by the downturn compared to the other devel- Intensive research oped economies and other economies in the region,” says Manoj Bhargava, who leads the India practice at This year’s India Business Law Journal survey of the Jones Day in Singapore. major international firms undertaking India work is Law firms also welcomed the results of the Indian drawn from an analysis of about 500 law firms from general election in mid-2009. However, some aspects of every continent and the matters they have handled government policy are causing concern. “The aggres- over the past 12 months. While no survey can be 100% sive nature of the India tax authorities is troubling to for- objective, India Business Law Journal has endeav- eign investors, and consequently has an adverse effect oured to draw insightful conclusions from the intensive on the willingness of foreign companies to be active in research undertaken.
    [Show full text]
  • Law Firms Join Forces to Ensure Firms Are Equipped to Have Conversations About Race
    LAW FIRMS JOIN FORCES TO ENSURE FIRMS ARE EQUIPPED TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT RACE 25 January 2021 | UK Firm news As organisations across the UK continue efforts to improve ethnic diversity and promote better understanding of race, a number of the UK’s leading law firms have joined forces to provide guidance that will enable effective conversations about race and racism in the workplace. NOTICED, the UK’s first inter-law firm diversity network which is comprised of thirteen City firms, is today launching a new toolkit offering a structured approach to conversations which many individuals otherwise feel is difficult to have. The guide, which can be viewed here addresses a range of issues. It will help individuals identify and deal with micro-aggressions, understand what actions can help them be an effective ally and hold effective conversations in the workplace. The guide also offers a number of practical solutions that law firms can take to improve. These focus on hiring and promotion and how firms can expand support beyond the legal profession. The launch of the guide follows member firms having individually taken a range of actions to address issues relating to race and ethnicity in the workplace*. Law Society of England and Wales president David Greene said: “We are pleased to contribute to NOTICED’s toolkit and hope this provides a useful resource for firms. The events of 2020 and our recent research into the experiences of black, Asian and minority ethnic solicitors has shown that now more than ever it is important for firms and legal businesses to lead from the front and have frank conversations about how to create a more inclusive workforce.” Siddhartha Shukla, senior associate at Herbert Smith Freehills and co-chair of NOTICED, says: "Given the increasing focus on ethnic and cultural diversity following events of 2020, NOTICED was keen to provide something tangible for member firms and the wider legal community to use when trying to improve the quality of conversations about race in the workplace.
    [Show full text]
  • Law Firm Report Sample Firm
    Law Firm Report Sample Firm NB: Data used in this sample report is for illustration purposes only Disclaimer: All information contained in this report is derived from Legal Monitor research and information available in the public domain. Worldwide Legal Research does not make any representations or warranties, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy or completeness of the data and information provided in this report. While Worldwide Legal Research has made every effort to ensure that the information in this report is correct, it does not assume any liability to any party for any loss or damage caused by the use of this report or any errors or omissions therein. Contents Financial Analysis [Date range (2008-2012)] Revenue 3 Profit 4 People 5 Profit & Loss Account 5 Underlying data table 6 Annual Profit Bridge 7 Law Firm Partner Data [Date Range (2009-2012)] Partners across all regions 8 Partners in Asia 10 Partners in Continental Europe 11 Partners in Eastern Europe 13 Partners in the Middle East 14 Partners in North America 15 Partners in the UK 17 Underlying data table 19 Lateral Partner Analysis [Date Range (2009-2012)] Lateral Partner Hires 2009-2012 20 Lateral Partner Hires 2009 21 Lateral Partner Hires 2010 22 Lateral Partner Hires 2011 23 Lateral Partner Hires 2012 24 Lateral Partner Hires - Data (2009-2012) 25 Lateral Partner Leavers - Data (2009-2012) 26 Partner Promotions Analysis [Date Range (2009-2012)] Partner Promotions 2009-2012 27 Partner Promotions 2009 28 Partner Promotions 2010 29 Partner Promotions 2011 30 Partner
    [Show full text]
  • All Notices Gazette
    ALL NOTICES GAZETTE CONTAINING ALL NOTICES PUBLISHED ONLINE ON 25 JUNE 2014 PRINTED ON 26 JUNE 2014 PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY | ESTABLISHED 1665 WWW.THEGAZETTE.CO.UK Contents State/2* Royal family/ Parliament & Assemblies/ Church/2* Companies/2* People/66* Money/ Environment & infrastructure/92* Health & medicine/ Other Notices/97* Terms & Conditions/98* * Containing all notices published online on 25 June 2014 STATE STATE COMPANIES Departments of State Corporate insolvency CROWN OFFICE NOTICES OF DIVIDENDS 2152057The Queen has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal 2152083In the Birmingham District Registry of the Realm dated 23 June 2014, to nominate the Reverend Canon No 6584 of 2013 John Bromilow Thomson, M.A., Ph.D., Director of Ministry in the ADVANTAGE TECHNOLOGY SERVICES LIMITED Diocese of Sheffield to be Bishop Suffragan of Selby and the 05963123 Venerable Paul John Ferguson, M.A., Archdeacon of Cleveland, to be Registered office: C/o Spearing Insolvency, 15 Highfield Road, Hall Bishop Suffragan of Whitby – both in the Diocese of York. Green, Birmingham B28 0EL C I P Denyer (2152057) Principal Trading Address: Eden House, Hartlebury Trading Estate, Hartlebury, Worcestershire DY10 4JB Notice is hereby given pursuant to Rule 11.2(1) of the Insolvency HONOURS & AWARDS Rules 1986, that I, Nigel Alexander Spearing, the Liquidator of the above-named Company, intend paying a First and Final dividend to 2152056BUCKINGHAM PALACE Creditors within two months of the last date for proving specified 25 June 2014 herein. Creditors who have not already proved are required on or THE QUEEN has been graciously pleased to give orders for the before 5 August 2014, to send in their names and addresses, with following Honorary appointments in Her Majesty’s Armed Forces:— particulars of their debts or claims, to the undersigned, Nigel Michael Cecil, Admiral the Lord BOYCE, KG, GCB, OBE, DL, as Alexander Spearing, of Spearing Insolvency, 15 Highfield Road, Hall Admiral of the Fleet.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Insight Series 2020: Paradigm Shift
    Legal Insight Series 2020 Paradigm Shift Part 5 of 10 Paradigm Shift The UK’s mid-tier firms appear on the surface to have shrugged off Brexit uncertainty and signs of a domestic economic slowdown, posting solid growth and impressive PEP increases in 2019. According to data released by Legal Business magazine second quartile firms in its Top 100 UK rankings saw revenues rise an average of 6% on a like for like basis to £135m. If the £140m generated by the transatlantic Womble Bond Dickinson merger had been included the rise would have almost doubled to 11%, outstripping the Top 25 in average revenue growth. Average PEP meanwhile rose an impressive 13% The alternative legal service provider market to £566,000. Firms with clearly communicated (ALSP) was worth more than $10bn annually in practice area and industry strengths – such as 2017 according to research by Thomson Reuters Fieldfisher, Stephenson Harwood and Travers carried out in 2019. This was an increase of 13% Smith – were the stand-out performers, part of a of the estimated $8.4bn in 2015, making it equal wider trend at all sections of the market towards to a third of the revenues (£24.2bn) posted by the increased specialism and geographic tightness entire top 100 UK firms in 2018/19. across the UK and Europe. Kennedys, a firm developing a host of new services Working out what you wish to be known for and aimed at their core insurance clients, has developed conveying that unwaveringly to clients is what an internal incubator that allows staff to become separates the winners and losers in an increasingly the CEO’s of their own product ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • Stephenson Harwood
    STEPHENSON HARWOOD One St Paul’s Churchyard London EC4M 8SH Vacation Schemes The above solicitors have vacancies for 18 students on their Vacation Schemes, which are two week placements held in June and July each year. Students spend one week in two different departments, shadowing a solicitor and attending an organised programme of talks, social events and interactive case studies. The Vacation Schemes are open to penultimate year/final year law students, final year non-law students and graduates. Applications open on 1 st November and the deadline is 17 th February 2006. Candidates should apply as early as possible via online application form available at www.cvmailuk.com/shlegal . Interviews will be held between November and March. Open Days The firm will be holding open days on: 20 th December 2005 29 th March 2006 4th April 2006 These days are designed to give students an insight into both the law and careers at Stephenson Harwood, and are open to students of any year and any discipline. To apply students should email a CV and covering letter, explaining why they are interested in a career with a leading medium sized, international City law firm to [email protected] . Places will fill up quickly so candidates should get applications in ASAP. Training contract applications The firm is recruiting 12 trainee solicitors to commence in March/September 2008. Applications open on 1st November and the deadline is 31 st July 2006. Candidates should apply via the online application form available from www.cvmailuk.com/shlegal . academic requirements are 26 UCAS points with the expectation of a 2.1 or above in any subject.
    [Show full text]
  • An Insight Special on Banking Litigation INSIGHT: BANKING LITIGATION
    Hunting titans An Insight special on banking litigation INSIGHT: BANKING LITIGATION Hunting titans As banks remain in the crosshairs of regulators and claimants, Legal Business teamed up with Stephenson Harwood to seek the views of the in-house banking community on attitudes to disputes and risk RICHARD LLOYD f you needed confirmation of just how Business worked with Stephenson Harwood challenging the litigation climate is for to canvass in-house lawyers at the major many of the world’s banks, then JPMorgan banks. We wanted to assess a range of topics, Chase’s results for the third quarter including how the volume and sources of provided it, in all their billion-dollar detail. litigation have varied in the last five years; IAnnouncing a $400m loss for Q3 in October, how banks’ litigation spend has changed; the bank revealed that it had set aside $23bn their approach to bringing cases against other for litigation costs arising from a series of banks; their views on arbitration and third- regulatory investigations, resulting litigation party litigation funding; and their approach and economic crisis-related suits. to selecting outside lawyers, gathering ‘We continuously evaluate our legal responses from more than 100 senior banking reserve but in this highly charged and in-house counsel. unpredictable environment, with escalating To many, both inside and outside of the demands and penalties from multiple banks, the shift in environment has been government agencies, we thought it was profound. ‘It’s changed in an unrecognisable prudent to significantly strengthen them,’ way,’ admits one head of litigation at a commented JPMorgan’s chief executive leading bank.
    [Show full text]
  • Resolving Workplace Disputes: Government Response to the Consultation
    Resolving Workplace Disputes: Government response to the consultation NOVEMBER 2011 Resolving Workplace Disputes - Government Response to Consultation Contents Resolving Workplace Disputes - Government Response to Consultation ...................................... 3 FOREWORD ................................................................................................................................... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................. 6 General response ............................................................................................................................ 7 Responses to specific questions ..................................................................................................... 8 1. Mediation (Q 1–7) ................................................................................................................... 8 2. Compromise Agreements (Q. 8–11)....................................................................................... 8 3. Early conciliation (Q. 12-20).................................................................................................... 8 4. Modernising Tribunals (Q. 21-56) ........................................................................................... 9 5. Unfair Dismissal qualification period (Q. 57-60) ..................................................................... 9 6. Financial Penalties (Q. 61-62) ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]