Employment Tribunal Advice

sol69_2

Hi,

I have today received a copy of a letter send to the The regional secretary from my ex-employer requesting a 10 day extension to submit the et3 in line with (Rule 11 (4) ). "quoting short delay in gathering paper work" and that the delay "should not prejudice the claimant"and giving me 7 days to reply to the tribunal directly asking that I cc them into any correspondence.

Should I reply to this?

As I believe the delay is unhelpful to my job search in the financial sector, and have in fact just been told by an employment agency that a large bank insist on not interviewing people with a dismissal on there record.

I fully expect to win my claim and secure a reference

Would I be able to use this as an opportunity to submit additional evidence to the tribunal that has came to light in the last week. This evidence is a deal breaker for any defence my x employer will submit

Any suggestions wording of letters most welcome as I am a person + MSE against a blue chip with a legal services dept.

Thank you

SarEl

The tribunal will give this extension no matter what you say, so don't waste your energy and time. As for any evidence you have - evidence goes to the full tribunal hearing and they won't consider it anytime else (escept possibly at a PHR if one is required). You will have to submit your evidence to form the bundle of evidence for tribunal at some stage, and then that will be sent to the hearing panel. Until then what evidence you have has no relevance to anything.

sol69_2

SarEl wrote: »

The tribunal will give this extension no matter what you say, so don't waste your energy and time. As for any evidence you have - evidence goes to the full tribunal hearing and they won't consider it anytime else (escept possibly at a PHR if one is required). You will have to submit your evidence to form the bundle of evidence for tribunal at some stage, and then that will be sent to the hearing panel. Until then what evidence you have has no relevance to anything.

Thank you again :A

2sides2everystory

I usually take what SarEl says more or less as gospel but bearing in mind that if this is a financial blue chip the OP's litigating against and the OP expects to win easily, then this isn't going to any final hearing, is it? It will be settled before.

So possibly if the OP has a few nuggets of wisdom which indirectly remind the Respondent who is boss, dish a little dirt, are thought provoking, and which cause them to incur further legal costs at an early stage in re-justifying the extension, then it might be useful tactfully to bring them to the negotiating table sooner rather than later. I have seen at least one example of an 'automatic' extension pruned back to an absolute minimum after a timely objection was logged causing the judge to rein in surplus undeserved flexibility.

Of course, unless the case is a potentially uncapped discrimination case, the actual "worth" of any ET award (and therefore the worth of any negotiated prior settlement) might not be very much if the OP feels they might soon walk straight into another comparable job.

In that case, as SarEl says, might not be worth the time and energy in getting too combative.

NB Unlike SarEl whom I believe to be such, I am not legally qualified, just seen a case or two.

SarEl

2sides2everystory wrote: »

I usually take what SarEl says more or less as gospel but bearing in mind that if this is a financial blue chip the OP's litigating against and the OP expects to win easily, then this isn't going to any final hearing, is it? It will be settled before.

So possibly if the OP has a few nuggets of wisdom which indirectly remind the Respondent who is boss, dish a little dirt, are thought provoking, and which cause them to incur further legal costs at an early stage in re-justifying the extension, then it might be useful tactfully to bring them to the negotiating table sooner rather than later. I have seen at least one example of an 'automatic' extension pruned back to an absolute minimum after a timely objection was logged causing the judge to rein in surplus undeserved flexibility.

Of course, unless the case is a potentially uncapped discrimination case, the actual "worth" of any ET award (and therefore the worth of any negotiated prior settlement) might not be very much if the OP feels they might soon walk straight into another comparable job.

In that case, as SarEl says, might not be worth the time and energy in getting too combative.

NB Unlike SarEl whom I believe to be such, I am not legally qualified, just seen a case or two.

You misinterpret my advice. It has nothing to do with being combative. It's dead simple. Extension to deadline asked for - extension to deadline given. End of story. No way will anything the OP says be listened to - so the extension will be granted, especially since it is only 10 days. Tribunals rarely turn them down and never on the first asking unless the amount of time asked for is unreasonable.

With the greatest of respect, I also never pay any heed to "I will win hands down" - it often doesn't work like that. I'm not disagreeing , nor agreeing, simply saying that people are often wrong!

The tribunal has little intetrest in what the evidence is or says in respect of the extension. A better strategy if the OP wants to force the employer to the table - and believes that what they have got is as good as they say- is to tell ACAS. They will use it to force the employer to the table if they can achieve a settlement and get out of a hearing altogether. Of course, as above, that assumes it is as good as the OP says - again, I have often seen "great evidence" that isn't quite that great!

sol69_2

SarEl wrote: »

You misinterpret my advice. It has nothing to do with being combative. It's dead simple. Extension to deadline asked for - extension to deadline given. End of story. No way will anything the OP says be listened to - so the extension will be granted, especially since it is only 10 days. Tribunals rarely turn them down and never on the first asking unless the amount of time asked for is unreasonable.

With the greatest of respect, I also never pay any heed to "I will win hands down" - it often doesn't work like that. I'm not disagreeing , nor agreeing, simply saying that people are often wrong!

The tribunal has little intetrest in what the evidence is or says in respect of the extension. A better strategy if the OP wants to force the employer to the table - and believes that what they have got is as good as they say- is to tell ACAS. They will use it to force the employer to the table if they can achieve a settlement and get out of a hearing altogether. Of course, as above, that assumes it is as good as the OP says - again, I have often seen "great evidence" that isn't quite that great!

I have been in touch with my acas appointed conciliator to ask the question re submitting extra evidence.

He really can't get involved until they submit there ET3, but he did mention case law and how he is there to try and reach agreement before it goes to tribunal.

Financial gain is not my motivation for submitting my claim, I want justice to be done have the the incident removed from my record.

I do have some dirt on the organisation but have not raised this, and am unsure if I can do this now as it has no bearing no my case, but in hindsight may have been the motivation for them to presue the action they have chosen

Uncertain

sol69 wrote: »

I fully expect to win my claim and secure a reference

Winning at a tribunal will not secure you a reference.

If you have a good case and they agree to settle then you may well be able be able to get an agreed reference as part of the settlement.

Keep in mind that, although they would be stupid to deviate from any agreed reference formally in writing, the grape vine can be powerful and very hard to police!

SarEl

sol69 wrote: »

I do have some dirt on the organisation but have not raised this, and am unsure if I can do this now as it has no bearing no my case, but in hindsight may have been the motivation for them to presue the action they have chosen

Let me be clear. "Dirt" and "evidence" are two different things. If what you have has no bearing on your case then using it in any way is not arguing your case - it is blackmail, and blackmail is an illegal activity. Use this with ACAS or a tribunal and they will wash their hands of you.

sol69_2

SarEl wrote: »

Let me be clear. "Dirt" and "evidence" are two different things. If what you have has no bearing on your case then using it in any way is not arguing your case - it is blackmail, and blackmail is an illegal activity. Use this with ACAS or a tribunal and they will wash their hands of you.

No I have not mentioned this to now for the above reason, once this affair is over I will potentially report it through the correct channels. I think it would have been covered by whistleblowing if I had acted sooner.

Them's the breaks