As part of the Government's drive to cut red tape for business and encourage growth in the economy, there is to be a rise in the qualifying period for brining a claim for unfair dismissal. It is currently 1 year, a period the employee must have worked continuoulsy for by the effective date of termination. From the 6th April 2012, that period will return to 2 years, the level it was until 1999 when New Labour lowered it to its current position. The new legislation will amend the law as stated in s.108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. There are no proposals to alter the right to claim automatic unfair dismissal on other protected grounds, where there is no qualifying period.
The qualifying period has changed over the years since its inception in 1971. It was initially 6 months, reaching 2 years in 1985. It has been the subject of litigation as well because previous rules on qualifying thresholds for part-time workers were found to be indirectly discriminatory against female workers. However, a challenge to the earlier 2 year period in R v Secretary of State for Employment ex p. Seymour-Smith, after a legal journey all the way to the House of Lords, then Luxembourg and back, ultimately failed.
It could be said that this is not really about cutting red tape per se. The rule was simple to apply whatever the length of the qualifying period. Encouraging employers to take on more employees by deregulating the early phase of employment as well as reducing the number of claims presented to the Employment Tribunal is what this proposal is all about. This is just one of a number of proposals, each of which have their own time-scale. There are proposals in respect of introducing a basic fee structure for tribunal claims, for example, as well as other measures to speed up the tribunal process. The Government's consultation document, published in January 2011 sets them out. Arguments against implementation are partly based on a battle of statistics. There are also fears that disqualified claimants will simply re-locate their claims within the discrimination legisltation. Whatever the opposition, the Government is intent on driving through business friendly measures to stimulate the economy.
The qualifying period has changed over the years since its inception in 1971. It was initially 6 months, reaching 2 years in 1985. It has been the subject of litigation as well because previous rules on qualifying thresholds for part-time workers were found to be indirectly discriminatory against female workers. However, a challenge to the earlier 2 year period in R v Secretary of State for Employment ex p. Seymour-Smith, after a legal journey all the way to the House of Lords, then Luxembourg and back, ultimately failed.
It could be said that this is not really about cutting red tape per se. The rule was simple to apply whatever the length of the qualifying period. Encouraging employers to take on more employees by deregulating the early phase of employment as well as reducing the number of claims presented to the Employment Tribunal is what this proposal is all about. This is just one of a number of proposals, each of which have their own time-scale. There are proposals in respect of introducing a basic fee structure for tribunal claims, for example, as well as other measures to speed up the tribunal process. The Government's consultation document, published in January 2011 sets them out. Arguments against implementation are partly based on a battle of statistics. There are also fears that disqualified claimants will simply re-locate their claims within the discrimination legisltation. Whatever the opposition, the Government is intent on driving through business friendly measures to stimulate the economy.
No comments:
Post a Comment