Employment Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 11: 11: Clause 4, page 4, line 15, after ““consent”” insert ““in writing”” The noble Baroness said: I will speak also to Amendments Nos. 12 and 13, which are grouped with this amendment. This is a series of amendments dealing with stand-alone cases, which are the kind of cases that the judge hears alone without the lay members of a tribunal being present. The employment judge can hear case management discussions, pre-hearing reviews and certain types of claim sitting alone. However, if the case involves any dispute of fact, as it often does, particularly where the case involves a dispute between the parties, usually between an employee and an employer, it ought to be heard by a full tribunal on which lay members sit. I understand from some people I know who sit on tribunals as lay members that the number of full tribunal sittings has been diminishing and more and more cases are being heard by a judge sitting alone; a so-called ““fast track”” procedure. I am grateful to the Minister for the very detailed assurances that he gave on the situation relative to lay members. We were very grateful for that, and I record that in this connection. But as far as the stand-alone process is concerned, it is frequently argued that this can only take place now with the consent of both parties. The problem with that is that we do not always know how the parties reach that consent. The idea of the amendments is to make sure that if an individual agrees to a stand-alone type case, he or she knows what it is about and his consent has been properly obtained, which is why we suggest that consent should be in writing. We also say that, "““the consent of any such party … shall be valid only after he has had a reasonable opportunity to take independent advice on the matter””." In other words, if an individual consents to his case being heard under stand-alone fast- track procedures, that individual should have made an informed decision to that effect. I hope that the Government will be prepared to accept the amendment, because in drafting the amendment we have tried to come to terms with what we believe to be the desire of the Government—to have more and more stand-alone cases where this can be reasonably, effectively and fairly administered and handled. On the other hand, we want to make sure that those people who opt for stand-alone cases know what it is about, give their consent and have access to independent advice before they enter into that process. I hope that the Government will be prepared to accept the amendment, which I stress is intended to be helpful. I beg to move.