interpretation of settlement

matlof

Can someone help me interpret the settlement?



1. Without admission of liability, the Respondent agrees to pay and
the Claimant agrees to accept the sum of £000 (“the Settlement Sum”) in full and final
settlement of Employment Tribunal case no. 0000 and all and any
other claims the Claimant may have in relation to her contract of
employment and the termination thereof, excluding claims in relation to
accrued pension rights which the Claimant is not, and could not reasonably
be aware of as at the date of this agreement and excluding claim with
regards to any future discriminatory conduct on the part of the Respondent.

Do this settlement shows that in the case of future discrimination, a new claim can be started regarding only discrimination after setlement or from a settlement results that discrimination after setlement excludes a settlement and a new claim may also apply to previous events?


Thanks for any help
Matt

Savvy_Sue

You must get proper paid for legal advice about any settlement. I'd be very surprised if it said what you think it says!

steampowered

The wording says that you are settling all claims in relation to your employment except for:

1) claims in relation to accrued pension rights you could not reasonably be aware of
2) claims concerning future discriminatory conduct

So if the employer discriminated against you in future, you could claim for that. But you could not bring a new claim for discrimination that happened in the past. A new claim would not be able to cover previous events.

Gavin83

steampowered wrote: »

The wording says that you are settling all claims in relation to your employment except for:

1) claims in relation to accrued pension rights you could not reasonably be aware of
2) claims concerning future discriminatory conduct

So if the employer discriminated against you in future, you could claim for that. But you could not bring a new claim for discrimination that happened in the past. A new claim would not be able to cover previous events.

This.

Stop getting greedy. They're giving you money to settle the case, either settle it and move on or take it to court. Don't try doing both.

Ozzuk

As Sue says, your agreement isn't binding if you don't get legal advice. The other party will possibly contribute towards it, but you must have it.

matlof

But it is COT3 agreement, so legal advice isn't necesarry

sangie595

matlof wrote: »

But it is COT3 agreement, so legal advice isn't necesarry

That is correct - but you did say "settlement" so it was a reasonable assumption for people to make.

The advice is correct - you would be able to bring an action only if an event happens after the contract is signed.

Are you getting an agreed reference as part of the COT3. I would always insist on an agreed reference, as it clears up exactly what the employer is going to say to potential employers.

I presume that you are familiar with the standard requirements of non-disclosure- because those can trip people up if they aren't aware.

matlof

I already signed COT 3 about 3 months ago and I think that my previous employer again discriminate me.


During negociacion we agreed werbally that people who discriminated against me would apologize to me personally in a formal way and that the company would thoroughly investigate the whole matter and punish those responsible for discrimination, that after investigation we agree exact form of appology.
In the settlement it was included in the paragraph:


"4. The Respondent hereby offers its sincere apologies to the Claimant
for any hurt and suffering she has experienced as a result of the way in
which matters were handled and is committed to reviewing all of the events
in detail and taking action if deemed necessary as a consequence."


However, currently the company claims that the company has already apologized to me in the settlement and there will be no other apologies. As far as I know, they did not draw any consequences in relation to people who discriminated against me despite evident proofs. The company only announced that they has put in place appropriate procedures to prevent such situations from happening again.


I agreed to significantly reduce the amount of the settlement if this condition will be met while they are currently trying to interpret this differently, they lie that there were no such oral agreements, they want to conceal discrimination as it regards employees with senior positions: regional director, general manager.



I think that it is victimisation.
Do you know if I can make a claim regarding those situation?


Thanks
Matt

Marcon

matlof wrote: »

I already signed COT 3 about 3 months ago and I think that my previous employer again discriminate me.


During negociacion we agreed werbally that people who discriminated against me would apologize to me personally in a formal way and that the company would thoroughly investigate the whole matter and punish those responsible for discrimination, that after investigation we agree exact form of appology.
In the settlement it was included in the paragraph:


"4. The Respondent hereby offers its sincere apologies to the Claimant
for any hurt and suffering she has experienced as a result of the way in
which matters were handled and is committed to reviewing all of the events
in detail and taking action if deemed necessary as a consequence."


However, currently the company claims that the company has already apologized to me in the settlement and there will be no other apologies. As far as I know, they did not draw any consequences in relation to people who discriminated against me despite evident proofs. The company only announced that they has put in place appropriate procedures to prevent such situations from happening again.


I agreed to significantly reduce the amount of the settlement if this condition will be met while they are currently trying to interpret this differently, they lie that there were no such oral agreements, they want to conceal discrimination as it regards employees with senior positions: regional director, general manager.



I think that it is victimisation.
Do you know if I can make a claim regarding those situation?


Thanks
Matt

I think this shows exactly why legal advice is always a good idea, whether or not it is 'required'.

Brynsam

Whatever has been agreed in writing is what both sides are bound by. You can't introduce new elements which haven't been accurately documented, so no, you aren't being victimised.

polgara

You agreed to the wording in the COT3 - they apologised and have put things in place. No employer should/would agree to 'punish' - they make take appropriate action but they wouldn't breach other employees' confidentiality.

Walk away and move on