The Gazette 1980

GAZETTE

SEPTEMBER 1980

The Employment Appeals Tribunal By GARY BYRNE, Solicitor

Table I Types of Claim 54% of claims included claims under the Min. Notice Act 51.3% of claims included claims under the U.D. Act 43.3% of claims included claims under the Redundancy Acts. Table II Representation Claimants 34.5% of claimants represented themselves 28.6% of claimants were represented by Solicitors — of these 39% used counsel 27.6% of claimants were represented by Trade Union 2.3% of claimants were represented by others 7.0% of claimants failed to appear Respondents 35.5% of respondents were represented by Solicitors - of these 27% used counsel 32.0% of respondents represented themselves 11.2% of respondents were represented by FUE 4.3% of respondents were represented by Construction Industry Federation 5.% of respondents were represented by 'others' 12.00 of respondents failed to appear Dismissal 40.0% of Unfair Dismissal cases were successful with a monetary total for the year of £146 , 138, with an average award of £1,228. 12.0% of U.D. claims resulted in an order of re- instatement 0.12% of U.D. claims resulted in an order of re- engagement 2.5% of U.D. cases resulted in awards of Maximum compensation. In 3 U.D. cases, claimants were successful, but no compensation was awarded. In 1 case, there was held to be an Unfair Dismissal, but that the employee contributed 100% Table III Results of Appeals (a) Unfair

Employers/Employees have traditionally avoided settling their differences in courts of law preferring to tackle their problems in a more informal and speedier manner, while retaining their rights to extra-legal sanctions. This reluctance of the parties to enter court is understandable in light of the comment of Geoffrey Lane, J., in the case of Ford Motor Co. Ltd., v. AUIFW and others 119691 W.L.R. 339, that the court was "merely concerned with the strict legal problems involved, regardless of their impact and regardless of their consequence". The legislature therefore, were faced with the difficult problem, in drafting the labour legislation of the 1970's, as to how to enforce the various Acts. Those Acts requiring to be dealt with were the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977, the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act, 1973, and the Redundancy Payments Acts. There was a need for what the Donovan Commission (Chap. X paragraph 578) called "an easily accessible, speedy, informal and inexpensive procedure for settlement of disputes". The problem was neatly sidestepped by revamping the old Redundancy Appeals Tribunal, and renaming it the Employment Appeals Tribunal. The Redundancy Appeals Tribunal was established under S.39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967, its scope was widened by S. 11 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act, 1973, and further extended by the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977, and under S. 18 of that Act, the title was changed to the "Employment Appeals Tribunal". The Tribunal consists of a Chairman and three Vice- Chairmen, with legal qualifications, and a panel of twenty four ordinary members, twelve nominated by I.C.T.U., and twelve by employer organisations. Each Division of the Tribunal consisted of a Chairman, and two of the ordinary members, one each from the I.C.T.U., and employer panels. The Tribunal is based in the Dept. of Labour building in Mespil Road, Dublin, but also sits at venues outside Dublin. In 1978, The Tribunal visited 69 such venues for 186 separate sittings. The Employment Appeals Tribunal produces an annual report, which is available from Government Publications. These reports indicate the volume of the work done by the Tribunal, and breaks it down into various headings such as types of representation, number of cases allowed or dismissed, etc. The difficulty with these figures is that each claim under cach Act is classified as an Appeal, when in actual fact, one Appeal can consist of claims brought under the three Acts, and the Claimant might only be successful in one of these claims. A simpler, and in my opinion, more accuratc method of assessing the effect of the Tribunal is to survey decisions, as published monthly, for a period of twelve months regardless of the date of filing of the claim, or hearing of the claim. Taking the 580 decisions published from January to Dcccmbcr (inclusive) 1979, the figures arc as follows: and Trade Unions

(h) Minimum Notice 33% of Minimum Notice claims were successful.

(c)

Redundancy 35.5% of Redundancy claims were successful.

Table IV General 31.5% of all claims were struck out on the merits 14.5% of all cases were settled, and 69% of these involved Solicitors 6% of cases were appeals from Rights Commissioners 0.9% of cases involved FLAC In 4.0% of cases. Accountants appeared for Respondents of eases where no appcarance was made by the Respondents, 7.5% were Liquidators.

147