‘Employees involved in spurious tribunals should be penalised’

Thursday 23rd June 2011, 2:30PM BST.

Sharon Peacock EMPLOYERS’ costs should be recoverable following spurious employment cases brought by sacked staff, according to a local HR and employment consultancy firm.

Law At Work, which operates in Guernsey and Jersey, advising businesses on employment law and HR issues, said it sympathised with a call from Maxicorp owner Zef Eisenberg for a change in tribunal laws to give employers more protection.

Mr Eisenberg successfully defended a claim brought by his former gardener, but had no way of being recompensed for lost time, effort and money defending it. He has since called for a change in employment tribunal laws to provide more protection for employers.

Sharon Peacock (pictured), a non-practising solicitor at Law At Work, who has represented companies at Guernsey tribunals, said hearings were intended to be informal and should not be stymied by onerous costs, but that her company would support the introduction of a wider costs regime than was currently in place.

Read the full story in the Guernsey Press. Click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.

To read Guernsey Press stories in full, click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.

View more: Employment news, Employment Tribunal news.

1
Mike

June 24, 2011 at 8:33 am

So this passes for objective comment and reporting – from a firm that represents employers and whose fees would, if this proposal is enacted, end up being paid by the very employees concerned. So no self-interest there then.

This proposal would merely frighten employees with legitimate grievences from bringing claims for fear of having to pay employer costs – but that is precisely what many employers really want.

Report abuse
2
Beanjar

June 24, 2011 at 9:29 am

It seems sensible to me to have some disincentive for people to make spurious claims. Not all companies are huge and wealthy – defending claims is expensive and time consuming. Perhaps a compromise would be to have an upper limit which would be sufficient to deter frivolous claims but which would not put justice beyond reach. Perhaps something like 10% of the amount claimed, costs need not necessarily be awarded by the tribunal.

Report abuse