- Beware! Voluntary Redundancy Can Lead to Unfair Dismissal Claims
- Can an Employer Make a Sick Employee Redundant?
- Are Employees Entitled to Time off to Attend a Funeral?
- Are You Looking for Mr Right*?
- Are All Your Balls Up in the Air?
- Should the UK Offer 24/7 Childcare for Working Parents?
- Gone Today, Here Tomorrow?
- How to Create Informal Mentoring Opportunities
- Perception of Disability
- How Managers Can Help Grieving Workers
- Not All Carrots Are the Same! Money and Motivation
- How to Stop Feeling So Stressed
- Can Dilbertian Thinking Improve Results?
- Court of Appeal Rules in New Holiday Pay Calculation Case
- Medical Information and GDPR
- You’re Having a Laugh!
- How to Ask For Help
- Employer’s Knowledge of Disability
- How Should Employers Deal with References Post-GDPR?
- Is It Time to Offer Bone Density Testing?
- Helping Employees Beat Loneliness and Depression Naturally
- Plants, Peace and Productivity
- The Messy Desk Conundrum
- The Pain of Living in Interesting Times
- Sabotaging Success
- Make it Mozart!
- Follow Proper Procedure Even in the Most Blisteringly Obvious Cases
- How to Speed Up Slow Performers
- Simple Belief of Discrimination is Not Enough
- Four Ways to Get More Done
Employment Law Update - Settling an Employment Tribunal Claim
Principles are all very well, but they can be seriously expensive and thus, irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the matter, the majority of employment tribunal claims are settled in order to avoid the stress and expense of attending a hearing.
Settling a claim is not an admission of liability, but respondents often make commercial decisions to settle claims to keep costs as low or controlled as possible. Even where a claim is completely without merit in reality it is cheaper to settle the claim than to fight it. Other times respondents try to settle claims which are high risk and when they know their defence is weak.
Going to court is expensive. Even if you’re staggeringly rich (think of Russians Boris Berezovsky who accused fellow tycoon Roman Abramovich of betraying and blackmailing him, and brought a multibillion dollar lawsuit over an oil deal this week) going to law is unpredictable and costly.
In employment terms it usually pays to settle .Some 80% of tribunal applications are settled or withdrawn. However, it does happen in about 20% of cases (especially in large companies where not fighting acts as an ‘open chequebook’) that the employer decides to defend a claim, even where the costs of preparation and presentation are more than the value of claim itself.
Where claims are settled, respondents face the risk of employees finding out that a sum of money has been paid to the claimant. This likelihood of this happening can be reduced by inserting a confidentiality clause in a settlement agreement. Agreeing to settle an employment tribunal claim is not just a matter for financial consideration.
The claimant can also benefit from an agreed employment reference as part of the settlement. Respondents usually want a confidentiality clause in the agreement and a statement to say that the claimant will be required to repay the settlement sum on breach of any terms of the settlement. Settlements can be reached via compromise agreements or through ACAS COT3 agreements.
ACAS offers a conciliation service which is aimed at helping both parties find a way of settling the claim. The service is free and is available to both parties. Claims which are settled before a hearing should then be withdrawn. The advantage of settling a claim through ACAS is that even just a verbal agreement is legally binding and ACAS will inform the Employment Tribunal of any cases settled in this way.
Subscribe to our free monthly HR newsletter. Russell HR Consulting employment law newsletters are emailed automatically to our ever-growing number of subscribers every month.