header-logo header-logo

02 December 2011 / Simon Cheetham KC
Issue: 7492 / Categories: Features , Tribunals , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail

A rare sighting

82842243_4

Simon Cheetham wonders why tribunal recommendations are such a rare beast

Tribunals have had the power to make recommendations in discrimination cases since the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, now found under the Equality Act 2010, s124. However, it is a remedy rarely requested and a power that is hardly ever used. As a result, employees are overlooking what may be—at the least—a useful bargaining chip and tribunals are missing an opportunity to try and tackle the problems they have identified.

Under s 124, a recommendation by the tribunal requires the respondent employer to take specified steps within a particular time period, “for the purpose of obviating or reducing the adverse effect” on either the claimant or any other person of any matter to which the discrimination proceedings relate.
Under previous legislation, the recommendation could only benefit the individual claimant, but now the tribunal can recommend action that would reduce the impact of the respondent’s discriminatory actions on the wider workforce.   

A trio of remedies

A recent Employment Appeal

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll