header-logo header-logo

14 September 2012
Issue: 7530 / Categories: Legal News , Disciplinary&grievance procedures , Employment
printer mail-detail

Cable Reduces Unfair Dismissal Cap

Employment lawyers have spoken out against today's proposals to reduce the £72,300 cap for unfair dismissal.

Business secretary Vince Cable announced today that the unfair dismissal cap is to be cut to either 12 months’ pay or a lower, as yet unspecified, amount.

Claimant lawyer Alison Humphrey, employment law solicitor at Russell Jones & Walker, said: “Slashing compensation award limits for unfair dismissal claims is another nail in the coffin for employee justice.
“Together with fees for issuing claims, and raising the eligibility threshold to two years’ service, these changes are likely to be a disincentive to bona fide claimants who have been treated genuinely unfairly.

At the same time, it will likely encourage a raft of other ‘day one rights’ claims, such as discrimination, which may add to complication and expense for employers.
 

“Compensation awards are calculated by reference to what an employee has actually lost as a result of the employer’s wrongdoing, so it in no way represents a windfall for employees. In circumstances where most awards don't reach the limit, it is difficult to see the justification for the move.”
 

Cable dropped an earlier proposal, made in Adrian Beecroft’s report in May, for compulsory no-fault dismissal. Instead, ‘settlement agreements’ could be introduced, under which employers and employees would come to an agreement in accordance with a code of practice to be drawn up by Acas.

Other reforms announced include proposals on how judges can reduce the number of preliminary hearings and dismiss weak cases more easily, and reforms to TUPE, which governs the transfer of teams of employees.
 

Ed Stacey, partner at PwC Legal, which acts for employers, warned the proposals risk increasing the number of discrimination and whistle-blowing claims.
 

“It is likely that the combination of increased fees for launching claims and the proposed reduction in awards for unfair dismissal claims will lead to a reduction in some of the low merit and low value claims,” he said.

“However, there is a risk that it will also incite employees to bolt on claims that remain uncapped such as claims for discrimination or whistle-blowing.”

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll