Anyone with experience of an unfair dismissal tribunal and what to expect?

[BlueFroggyBlue]

I was recently unfairly dismissed from my job, I’ve started the process of taking my ex-employer to tribunal. Does anyone here have experience of this? I’m not really sure what to expect next.

The whole ordeal has really knocked my confidence and left me feeling very low. I’ve not been able to secure a new job yet - we’ve managed okay for the past few months but our savings are starting to run out. My GP thinks I’m best not working and suggested I apply for PIP but I don’t think I’d get it.

@Mothrasstillmoshing can I ask how you found out how long it would take please, did the tribunal give you a timescale and did they do that immediately after your ET1? I'm in Scotland where it may hopefully be quicker.

Would you mind sharing what financial settlement you got?

Yes, we are also claiming for disability discrimination and harassment.

I’ve heard it can be a long and arduous process. I’m not doing it for the money, it’s the principle and wanting to hold them to account. I think they are hoping I will give up and go away.

Sorry you are going through the same thing too @weegielass01

Are you taking advice?

DH started down this road, but the company settled very quickly once ACAS were involved and it was clear they couldn't win. IME companies don't go to tribunal unless they expect to win.

You are more likely to win if you can show they didn't follow process, than if you try to argue they were overly harsh in the judgement which resulted in your dismissal.

The waiting time is very long due to a lack of judges, increase in litigants in person and AI being used is also having an impact. This was in The Times over the weekend

www.thetimes.com/article/17a9c7c9-bff0-4c79-a495-9a3e25952e38?shareToken=c4bd36b5ad412c8771cd2d6a3d787b6f&ver=article

That’s an interesting article @HobnobsChoice

Even though they didn’t engage with ACAS early conciliation, I’m hoping once they realise I’m not backing down they will want to settle before tribunal.

Presumably if my Union lawyers are saying I have reasonable prospects of success to the point they are happy to proceed, then their lawyers will be telling them they are best making a settlement offer?

I have been thinking about that article - I also found it really interesting. In a way the flaws in the system are why it works. The people who get all the way to tribunal are disproportionately the cases where the evidence matters or they may have been there before or which are highly contentious, because almost everyone else will settle. Insurer panel solicitors will risk appraise the cases they defend. Tribunal judges will make pretty clear at preliminary hearings which cases look like they have legs and which don't. Claimants will fall out of the system or settle at lower amounts out of exhaustion or wanting to move on.

That is not a defence of the system at all. I just wish we used barrister-led mediation or something like that much more in employment law. Perhaps it is another thing Andy Burnham can get on after fixing cowboy builders and how houses are sold.

Not necessarily.

They may not use lawyers. They may use them but ignore their advice.

Union lawyers can be overly optimistic on chances of success, I've won against them in the past and I assume they told their client they would win.

However, dismissing you as a result of bringing a grievance is automatic unfair dismissal. So you've a good chance there if you can show the link.

Judges don't like SOSR being used to avoid proper process so there will be much interrogation into that.

And, if there's evidence of the remark, that's great. But in discrimination claims I believe you don't have to prove it happened, they have to prove it didn't (reverse burden of proof) so you've probably got a reasonable chance there.

Of course, we only have your version of things.

However, dismissing you as a result of bringing a grievance is automatic unfair dismissal

no it isn’t. Depending on what the grievance is there could still be a claim of course but there’s not a standalone right not to be unfairly dismissed just because you raise a grievance

And, if there's evidence of the remark, that's great. But in discrimination claims I believe you don't have to prove it happened, they have to prove it didn't (reverse burden of proof) so you've probably got a reasonable chance there

This is not quite right either. There is a reverse burden of proof in discrimination claims, but it doesn't mean that simply alleging a discriminatory remark means the employer has to prove it didn't happen. The claimant first has to establish facts from which the tribunal could infer discrimination. Only then does the burden shift to the employer to show there was no discrimination.

Telephone the ET and ask to watch a case.