Understanding of the Functions and Aims of Tribunals

Question: Demonstration of a clear understanding of how a tribunal works in practice and how it achieves the purposes for which it was established. Explain the issues surrounding use of precedent by tribunals. Answer: Introduction In United Kingdom, Employment Tribunals (also referred to as the Tribunal') have the status of an independent judicial body which serves to resolve disputes arising between the employers and employees in connection with the rights of employment. These Tribunals hear the claims concerning matters of employment, for instance, matters concerning redundancy, wages, unfair dismissal, and discrimination. The procedures of the Employment Tribunals are not as formal as that of the courts. For instance, it is not necessary to wear a gown at an Employment Tribunal. Like courts, the proceedings of the Tribunal are open for public access, and the evidence is given on affirmation or under oath. Details about Proceedings at the Tribunal The Tribunals have their own rules of procedure. Evidence at the Tribunals is assessed on the basis of the balance of probabilities. The claimants or the respondents do not have to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt. At the hearings, the Tribunals interrogate the witnesses, who are questioned under oath rather than providing written statements. Questions are put to the witnesses in an informal manner. Cross- examination of the witnesses is also conducted by the other party. Generally, the decisions are delivered by the Tribunal at the conclusion of the proceedings, on the day of the hearing itself. However, at times, if the cases are complex, the decision is announced after a few days. The said copy of the decision is forwarded to both the parties. If any party is not satisfied with the decision, it may either prefer an appeal to an Employment Appeal Tribunal or it may require the Tribunal to review the decision. Appeals should be preferred, if any, within a period of six weeks from the date of the decision and must always be based on points of law (Cushway, 2010). The proceeding that I observed was regarding unfair dismissal of an employee. The claimant, Mrs. Hargreaves used to work as a riding instructor. Some horses were used for giving the riding lessons, and others were kept to be used by clients against payment of fees. On one occasion, Mr. Hargreaves asked her manager for a sit on permission for her niece. The manager agreed to it. Later it was discovered that the child was only four years old, and the minimum age for riding happened to be five. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against Mrs. Hargreaves for this conduct. Many other charges were leveled against her in the proceedings, and she was dismissed. At the hearing, Mrs. Hargreaves accepted that she did not comply with the rules strictly and that she did not regard it to be a strict requirement for an informal sit on. The Tribunal decided that Mrs. Hargreaves did not intentionally lie about the age of the child, and she was just mistaken. Moreover, since she was unaware of the issue of insurance, she did not consider the age of the child to be significant. The Tribunal concluded that the company was at fault for having dismissed Mrs. Hargreaves and ordered for reinstatement of her services. Appeal Procedure of the Tribunal In case a party to an employment dispute is not satisfied with the decision of the Employment Tribunal, it may prefer an appeal to the Employment Appellate Tribunal. The grounds on which an appeal may be preferred before an Employment Appellate Tribunal (also referred to as the EAT) are as follows; Application of improper laws Incorrect procedures have been followed The decision has not been reasoned The decision reflects biased attitude on the part of the Tribunal The appeal must be filed within six weeks from the date on which the decision was communicated to the parties. To initiate an appeal against a decision of the Tribunal, a Notice of Appeal must be served on the Employment Appellate Tribunal. The following details must be stated in the Notice of Appeal; Information about the parties The points of law on the basis of which the appeal has been filed The order that the appellant expects the EAT to deliver Documents, such as the original claim and response, the decision, and reasons of the Tribunal Purpose of Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanism The reasons that weigh in favor of adoption of Alternative Dispute Resolution methods are as follows; These ADR mechanisms appear to be much cheaper as compared to court proceedings. Decisions are passed by the adjudicating authority of the ADRs quicker than the court. These mechanisms are non-adversarial. Mediation that is one of the ADR mechanisms tries to arrive at a mutually agreeable point rather than the court that makes one party a winner and the other a loser. ADR mechanisms are very flexible. The parties are free to decide on their own rules and also the laws that they want to abide by. Owing to the above-stated reasons, we may say that at present the ADR mechanisms have become very popular amongst the business entities. The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (also referred to as the Acas) The Acas is a non-departmental public body of the Government of the United Kingdom. The aim of this body is to improve the working conditions of the organizations by way of promoting and facilitating tough industrial relations (Turner, 2013). This body achieves its objecting by various ADR methods like arbitration, mediation, and conciliation. The Acas is an impartial body that does not part ways with one side but renders decisions that appear to be acceptable to both parties concerned. The Acas intends to prevent problems from arising by way of telephone help lines and organizing training sessions (Parker, 2002). The Acas is considered to be a successful means of resolution of disputes owing to the following reasons; It improves the relations between employers and employees and prevents conflicts by way of providing Codes of Practice and also rendering guidance as regards, drafting of employment contracts or suggesting the employers ways to avoid disputes, etc. It provides training so as to enable the employers and employees to abide by its Code of Practice It provides conciliation services to the parties in dispute. Befoe a claim is filed with an Employment Tribunal, parties must notify the Acas. It tries to establish a mutually agreeable solution to the problems of the parties so that the potential time, costs and stress of undergoing the Tribunal system may be avoided. It also renders collective conciliation services to enable the employers and employees to reach mutually agreeable solutions to problems that affect groups of employees. It provides mediation services to enable the organizations for resolution of conflicts that arise amongst individuals within organizations. Conclusion We may conclude the aforesaid discussion by stating that the Employment Tribunals with the aid of the Acas has come a long way in resolving disputes arising between employers and employees with respect to rights of employment. References Cushway, B. (2010). The employer's handbook. London: Kogan Page. Cushway, B. (2014). The Employer's Handbook 2014-15. London: Kogan Page. Cushway, B. and Hallsworth, I. (2012). The employer's handbook 2012-13. London: Kogan Page. Mangan, D. (2013). Employment Tribunal Reforms to Boost the Economy. Industrial Law Journal, 42(4), pp.409-421. Martin, D. (2011). The A-Z of employment practice. London: Thorogood. Parker, G. (2002). Employment Appeals Tribunal. https://www.employmentappeals.gov.uk. Occupational Medicine, 52(3), pp.171-171. Phillips, J. (1978). Some Notes on the Employment Appeal Tribunal. Industrial Law Journal, 7(1), pp.137-142. Taylor, S. and Emir, A. (2009). Employment law. Oxford: New York. Turner, C. (2013). Unlocking Employment Law. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. Urwin, P., Buscha, F. and Latreille, P. (2013). Representation in UK Employment Tribunals: Analysis of the 2003 and 2008 Survey of Employment Tribunal Applications (SETA). British Journal of Industrial Relations, 52(1), pp.158-184.