header-logo header-logo

How to make employers pay up?

13 November 2013
Issue: 7584 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Judges could demand employer deposits in employment tribunals

Employment tribunal judges could be given new powers to demand deposits from employers, after research showed more than half of successful claimants do not receive their money.

Only 49% received their award in full, while 16% received part of their payment and the rest got nothing, according to a study by IFF Research for the department for business, information and skills (BIS), Payment of employment tribunal awards 2013.

Longer serving employees were more likely to receive their award—29% of those with less than a year’s service received full or partial payment, compared to 72% of those who had worked for longer than five years. The average award was £2,600.

Relatively few—one in five—claimants who were not paid in full took enforcement action. The main reason given was that they did not know how to do this. In more than a third of cases, the employer had not paid because they were insolvent—but half of employees in this situation said the company was now trading under a different name.

Enforcement action works in about 50% of cases.

The study, based on interviews with 1,200 claimants in the UK and published in November, acknowledges that the rise in tribunal fees for employment cases “is perhaps a particular concern in light of the forthcoming changes to the employment tribunal process where individuals will need to pay an ‘issue fee’ to file a case with the employment tribunal and a further ‘hearing fee’ if the claim proceeds to a hearing”. 

Sarah Naylor, employment solicitor with Atherton Godfrey, says: “Claimants are often very disheartened to find that after going through what is usually a lengthy and stressful tribunal claim, they then have to face a further set of proceedings in the county court or fast track enforcement system to try and recover what they are due.”

Employment relations minister Jo Swinson says the government is considering giving judges powers to demand deposits from employers, introducing fixed penalty notices for late payment and naming and shaming employers who fail to pay out.

 

Issue: 7584 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll