ET and unexpected letter from ACAS - good or indifferent?

[HitAbove]

I've name changed for this.

I'm currently working my notice but have been signed off sick with work related stress so effectively have left work.

I started an employmemt tribunal claim against my employer for unfair dismissal. I asked for early concilliation through ACAS but my employer said no. They have until next Thursday to give their first response to my claim.

I came home to a letter from ACAS today saying they will be contacting me to discuss the possibility of reaching a settlement. Does anyone know if this means my employer is now potentially willing to come to an agreement? Or is it just standard?

I am absolutely willing to go all the way with this as I think I have a good case (but doesn't everyone I guess) but obviously if we can come to an arrangement before then then that would be preferable.

The letter has thrown me a bit.

My redundancy letter says I was made redundant from my substansive post?
I just checked as what you are saying makes sense.

I would check your.home insurance and see if you have legal cover. My DP refused a settlement as he knew if he won at tribunal he would be offered more. We took the offer as an admission of guilt but found out after they had just offered DP an amount equal to their estimated legal costs. DP employer had a red hot lawyer and DP lost on a legal technicality. Good luck OP it's a very stressful process.

Bluntness - I will be going to CAB Thursday by the way.

Sandgown - that sucks. :( Is he happier now though?

CAB will advise you to get an employment solicitor reviewing your case, they are not qualified to give you legal advice.

If you have household insurance you will need to determine the actual dates of your "event" ie when you claim your employer unfairly dismissed you, and your official last day of employment.

As you have already submitted your ET 1 you are in play within the Tribunal limit of 3months less 1 day from your unfair dismissal (which you are saying they engineered with a redundancy).

Your priority is an assessment of your case preferably by a barrister because they have expertise in case Law and the strength of your claim. What you don't want to do is burn through your potential award with hefty legal fees before the Tribunal even sits. Your employer will bank on that, which is why they are continuing to fight on.

My redundancy letter says I was made redundant from my substansive post?

That's interesting. Are you saying someone else is now doing your job, so a whole new person and the team is still at 8?

I think there is a very high chance they have broken the law.

CAB will advise you to get an employment solicitor reviewing your case, they are not qualified to give you legal advice

This isn't quite true, as my daughter, a final year law student, does pro bono work for them. Effectively the students do the work and then a fully qualified solicitor reviews and signs off any advice given. Alternate if the client meeting is face to face the solicitor sits in whilst the students do the work. This is now the service provided due to the reduction in legal aid.

There is also no reason a barrister should review this, they would simply point her back to an employment solicitor . A barrister is only required if it is going to court and the solicitor would pull them in if required. A solicitor would review the case law. So a barrister is not required.

Agree though she needs an employment law solicitor.

Bluntness It is not predictable there will be a legal specialist volunteer on hand in CAB who can give the OP advice in the timescales they need. No disrespect but I wouldn't want a final year prequalified Law student giving advice on an ET claim, would you?

A barrister is a far better investment than a solicitor when it comes to assessing whether a claim stands a high likelihood of success, as they can research and advise on legal precedent, whilst a solicitor tends to focus mainly on taking instruction from their client.

Merit assessment costs £750 approx. That doesn't mean the barrister has to be engaged to go to ET, if anything it becomes a useful risk-based exercise pre-Tribunal as to whether it's even worth pursuing to ET.

OP, what do you want our of this? You say it's not about the money. Is it about proving a point? Getting your own back?

Are you 100% sure you're going through all this stress and hassle for the right reasons?

K2p2k2tog - it IS about the money. Trying to make a point is... um... pointless. Regardless of the outcome they will never admit wrong doing. I would love to say this will stop them behaving badly in the future but I don't believe that. The only "satisfaction" I can hope to gain is monetary. Anything else is a waste of my time and effort. In a year, they'll have forgotten about me and people will have the same crap to deal with that they always have.

Bluntness100 - no. No one is in my post. I don't know whether they will advertise it after I leave. I suspect not because I have a protected characteristic which guarentees an interview if I meet the basic criteria (which I hope I would having done the job for 7 years!) and favourable terms after an interview. Basically if they advertised and I applied, as long as I didn't mess up they would have to employ me. My characteristic was nothing to do with my redundancy - no discrimination or anything like that.

I have a feeling they'll just reorganise the team so the post becomes natural wastage.

However, as I say, at the time of my redundancy the post still exisits. If there was a genuine redundancy, they would have had to carry out some sort of assesment process between all the people in the team doing the same job at the same wage etc.

I should add that I have genuingely lost out financially. I will never get the benefits I had ever again (times have changed in 12 years). It's a specialiast role in a small working community where people talk. I burnt my bridges when all this started. The likelyhood of me getting work in this field ever again is slim.
That's ignoring the fact that I now am not paying into a pension, am now jobless and when I get another job I won't have any employment rights.

Sorry I misinterpreted what you said - when you posted that you weren't interested in a settlement, i took that to mean that the money wasn't important.

If you feel you have a strong case, and they owe you money then best of luck for the tribunal. Hopefully they'll be ordered to pay you every penny they owe you.

I don't think I was very clear about the agreemenrs as it's confused a few people. :)

The settlement agreements offered me nothing.

The first one wasn't a settlement agreement. I was a just document they wanted me to sign to say I won't take any legal action against them. They tried to make out like it was in my benefit to sign it but it didn't offer me anything in return for waving those rights. I would have gained nothing by signing it.

The second one asked me to say I won't take further action and in return they would pay me my notice period. No other carrots. The thing is I'd been signed off sick by that point so wasn't working my notice anyway. So again, no reason to sign it.

They wouldn't negogiate either time.

They have definetly broken the law. You are entitled to one weeks pay for every year worked there plus notice. In addition I think that they have also broken the law in other ways, you do need to see an employment solicitor, see what cab says.

As to this,

No disrespect but I wouldn't want a final year prequalified Law student giving advice on an ET claim, would you?

Yes, if I could not afford a lawyer and was not entitled to legal aid and as a qualified solicitor either attends or reviews and signs off any advice, I would. Some people cannot afford a solicitor and are not entitled to legal aid wnd this is the governments solution.

And she does not need a barrister. A barrister would tell her to see a solicitor. A solicitor will tell her if she has a claim, they prepare the case documentation. And they represent in court and for things like litigation and et, a barrister represents in the higher courts. She does not need one. It's ridiculous to suggest she does.

Bluntness, your sweeping statement that barristers represent in higher courts (inferring they don't attend employment tribunals) makes it patently obvious you haven't in depth knowledge about employment tribunals and what barristers do. So, whatever ....

That's ignoring the fact that I now am not paying into a pension, am now jobless and when I get another job I won't have any employment rights

OP one thing to bear in mind if you want to take this all the way, it will be in your best interests to use the next few weeks to get your updated CV out there, as you will need to demonstrate how you have mitigated loss by seeking alternative employment. It doesn't mean you need to have secured new employment, just that you've made efforts to do so.

Thanks ladies but please don't argue. X

I have to admit that the only time I've used CAB, a very long time ago, I waited over an hour for them to print some stuff off the internet for me. I understand the volunteers work hard but I think it's down to luck/experience of the staff if they can help. I'll give them a go and see what happens.

I am very concerned that I'm missing something obvious here though? You're both worrying me that I've done something very stupid!

I was looking and applying for jobs during my new role but it just all got too much before I was signed off. I am feeling so much better now so you're right, I'll start applying again.

I'd summarise your case and book a face to face with an employment solicitor which should cost about £200. It's too difficult advising when we could risk missing something. We can give a general impression if it sounds dodgy, but you need someone's eyes on the entire case to be certain.

Has your case been looked at by your union branch or by a unison full time officer?
Have you filled in a case form for unison?
Go back to them today, and contact the regional office asking for advice from the Regional officer who covers your branch. (Are you in cvs?).
I know they have treated you badly, but before you shell out £200 on a solicitors appointment - it’s worth a try. I would wager the regional officer knows nothing about it.

what was the outcome of this case @HitAbove ?