Pushing back the Equality Clock!

There have been two developments in recent weeks that could push the clock back on equality at work topics that I thought were settled.

·???????? One is about the possible reintroduction of fees for lodging an employment tribunal claim.

·???????? The other is a claim that Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Officers in the NHS and by implication the rest of the ?public sector are being scrapped.

Employment Tribunal(ET) Fees

The ?Coalition Government (2010 to 2015) introduced these fees in 2013. The system categorised ET claims into ‘Type A’ or ‘Type B’ claims with different fees payable dependent on whether the claim was a Type A or Type B claim. Type A claims (which covered simple disputes such as unpaid holiday pay) attracted an issue fee of ￡160 and a hearing fee of ￡230, totalling ￡390 in fees. Type B claims (which covered more complex disputes such as discrimination) attracted an issue fee of ￡250 and a hearing fee of ￡950, totalling ￡1200 in fees. The EAT attracted a ￡400 issue fee and a ￡1200 hearing fee, totalling ￡1600 in fees.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the introduction of fees led to a substantial fall in the number of claims brought to the ET. Case volumes fell by 53% in the 12 months after the fee change - from 59,000 cases between July 2012 and June 2013 to 28,000 cases between July 2013 and June 2014.

I can only offer anecdotal evidence but my modest caseload through voluntary advocacy on employment and discrimination claims fell drastically, reflecting these figures. It’s hard to convey here the stress and fears people have about taking a genuine case in the first place but when ?compounded with a bill of ?￡1600 the people I was trying to help simply withdrew.

In 2017 the Supreme Court scrapped ?the Fees Order. It ?held that the fees were unlawful as (a) they were in practice unaffordable, and (b) they rendered pursuing non-monetary and low value claims – which suffered a greater fall in volumes – futile and irrational, which effectively prevented access to justice.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court held that the fee structure was found to be indirectly discriminatory against women and individuals with protected characteristics, who were more likely to bring Type B claims and therefore liable to pay the higher fee.?

But now they might be coming back albeit at a lower rate of ￡55! In a nutshell, the Government propose ?introducing the ￡55 issue fee that is payable by the claimant on bringing a claim to the ET. And there would be a further ￡55 fee in the event of an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).

￡55 seems a small amount but to a lot of people I help, it can be a small fortune. The rigmarole of getting assistance to pay introduces a further stress. And perhaps I am cynical but I think if the ￡55 gets on the table, then slowly slowly it will increase year in year out!

What’s to be done?

The Government have opened consultation which expires on 25th March 2024. There is a questionnaire covering some of the outline arguments set out above and in the detailed link below. Please send your response by 25 March 2024 to:

Fees Policy Ministry of Justice 102 Petty France London SW1H 9AJ

Email: MOJ Fees Policy?[email protected]

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/introducing-fees-in-the-employment-tribunals-and-the-employment-appeal-tribunal/introducing-fees-in-the-employment-tribunals-and-the-employment-appeal-tribunal

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Officers(EDI) – Withering Away?

One of the tasks that these officers often carry out in both the public and private sector is to undertake with colleagues Equality Impact Assessments(EIAs) of any policy, procedure or practice from either an employment or service delivery perspective. They test for equality of access, choice and process. Carried out robustly with the use of objective data and the consultation/involvement of those affected they can both save money and identify new ways of working. If an EIA had been used by the Coalition Government in 2013 before they introduced ET fees, the detriments identified by the Supreme Court ?in 2017 would have been self-evident!

There is growing evidence from the mainstream Civil Service and in the education sector that these posts are being scrapped. Some ?are paid posts but very often a hard-pressed public servant or teacher facing burn out in their remunerated job will have taken on the EDI role in a voluntary capacity. And eventually something has to go.

Two weeks ago, the Spectator magazine published an article suggesting this trend to move away from EDI officers? is being accelerated? in the NHS. I have not?fact checked?the article but it points in this direction. The link is below. It’s clearly hostile to the idea of EDI officers on grounds of costs, claims that it’s a growth industry and has a sarcastic assertion saying that the officers spend all their time taking cases against each other!?

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/does-the-nhs-need-any-diversity-officers/

EDI Officers and Equality Impact Assessments

I have practical case studies from ?my own work with clients showing how these EDI officers liaising with colleagues on EIAs and associated initiatives have secured great results. Results that have either made added value improvements to and/or understanding of:-

·???????? Catering

·???????? Cultural Communication

·???????? Curriculum Content

·???????? Event Organisation

·???????? Guide Dogs and Assistance Dogs

·???????? Home Visits

·???????? Interview Arrangements

·???????? Lesson Plans

·???????? Religious and Faith Protocols

·???????? Remote Working

·???????? Menopause Policies

·???????? Payment of Expenses

·???????? Protective Equipment

·???????? Post Covid Return to Work policies

·???????? Remote Working

·???????? Sickness Absence Management

·???????? Signposting and Posters

·???????? Timings

Almost A to Z!

The cost of NOT doing any of these would have been damaging and costly.

www.qedworks.co.uk

?

?