header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

The Unison effect

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
16 March 2018 / Steve Hynes
Issue: 7785 / Categories: Opinion , Tribunals , Legal aid focus , Profession , Employment
printer mail-detail
nlj_7785_hynes

Steve Hynes discusses the root causes of a big rise in employment tribunal cases

Rises of up to 90% have been reported by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) in their latest statistics on employment tribunal (ET) cases released on 8 March. The trend of an increase in claims has become established over the last six months since the successful challenge, brought by the trade union Unison, to the introduction of the ET fee scheme.

From 29 July 2013 two levels of fees were introduced for ETs. For type A claims involving cases such as non-payment of wages, a fee of £160 was payable to issue proceedings. A charge of £250 was made for type B cases which included discrimination and unfair dismissal claims. With the hearing fee the total cost for a type A would be £390 and £1200 for a type B case. The impact of the fees was immediate as the number of cases being brought plummeted by around 70%.

After the success of Unison’s case before the Supreme Court

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
Read All
Public Accounts Committee warn of ‘extinction’ risk for legal aid
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
NLJ this week: The insider returns
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
NLJ this week: Drawing the line on contempt
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
NLJ this week: Stop and search by the numbers
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
NLJ this week: Looking back on the prorogation that never was
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll