MSE News: Employees to be given more rights... 7 February 2018 at 5:18PM in Employment, jobseeking & training 4 replies 1.5K views

Former_MSE_Callum

Interns, agency workers and 'gig economy' employees will be given greater rights under a new Government plan...

Read the full story:
'Employees to be given more rights under new Government plan'

Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply.

BorisThomson

And the reality ...

The Tory government drastically reduced workers rights by doubling the qualifying period and by introducing tribunal fees. Tribunal fees have since been ruled unlawful.

They are now claiming to be pro workers rights by putting forward Labour's manifesto policies as their own. Policies that they previously claimed to be unworkable.

Same old, same old.

sangie595

BorisThomson wrote: »

And the reality ...

The Tory government drastically reduced workers rights by doubling the qualifying period and by introducing tribunal fees. Tribunal fees have since been ruled unlawful.

They are now claiming to be pro workers rights by putting forward Labour's manifesto policies as their own. Policies that they previously claimed to be unworkable.

Same old, same old.

And actually, half of these are non-promises - they are going to tell you what your rights are?; working their way through the courts already and they'll be forced to do then soon; or the right to ask for something, which means the employer had the right to refuse!

Seriously, there is nothing at all new in any of this. And tribunal fees will be back sooner or later - although, to an extent, we have brought some of that on ourselves by people making totally spurious claims knowing they can't win (the majority paying for a minority again).

Any worker who expects any government to give them their "rights" is living in cloud cuckoo land. History has taught us that rights are taken, not given.

ThreadDefender

sangie595 wrote: »

we have brought some of that on ourselves by people making totally spurious claims knowing they can't win (the majority paying for a minority again).

Sorry, but that's a myth peddled by the likes of the Daily Mail. There is no evidence whatsoever that fees deterred "spurious" claims. "Spurious" or vexatious claims (as they're known in legal terms) also come with a high risk of costs being awarded against the Claimant, that's if the case isn't struck out in the early stages.

Also, the law is stacked against the employee, and losing a case does not necessarily mean it was a case without merit. Most often it just means the Claimant could not prove the facts alleged; which itself is not surprising as the employer is usually the one in possession of all the evidence and criminal case standards of disclosure do not apply in civil cases.

sangie595

ThreadDefender wrote: »

Sorry, but that's a myth peddled by the likes of the Daily Mail. There is no evidence whatsoever that fees deterred "spurious" claims. "Spurious" or vexatious claims (as they're known in legal terms) also come with a high risk of costs being awarded against the Claimant, that's if the case isn't struck out in the early stages.

Also, the law is stacked against the employee, and losing a case does not necessarily mean it was a case without merit. Most often it just means the Claimant could not prove the facts alleged; which itself is not surprising as the employer is usually the one in possession of all the evidence and criminal case standards of disclosure do not apply in civil cases.

Read what I said again! I did not say that fees deterred spurious claims. I said that spurious claims were the cause of the imposition of fees. They were. I oddly also know what a vexatious claim is. It's the sort of claim that comes from, for example, people on boards like this saying that someone doesn't have a claim in law, but if they make one anyway, the chances are that the employer will settle because of the costs of a tribunal. That's a vexatious claim!

And if you ever spent any time on this board you'd know that I regularly point out that the law is stacked against the employee. And that an employee will get nowhere without evidence.

The law has never defended employees. Employees defend themselves. But I'm glad you read the Daily Mail. Somebody has to, and it certainly isn't me!


PS, my apologies, I didn't read that you were an expert on posters here based on your entire SIX posts in as many years! Wow, reading the Daily Mail must take more time than I thought.