Employment Bill [HL]

Earlier in Committee we spoke to amendments that looked at the introduction of this fast-track system within the tribunals and emphasised that its purpose will be to promote and to settle claims made in straightforward cases and in limited jurisdictions. The emphasis here is very much on simple cases where it would be beneficial for both parties to resolve the issue quickly and efficiently. That does not necessarily mean uncontested cases; they can already be dealt with in a different way. Over 70 per cent of respondents to the Government’s consultation supported this approach and many put forward arguments for jurisdictions which should be included. On the strength of these responses, the Government proposed that the jurisdictions eligible for the fast-track system would be as follows: unlawful deductions from wages, breach of contract, redundancy pay, holiday pay and the national minimum wage. Claims falling within this narrow band that are combined with other jurisdictions will not be eligible for the fast-track process. Amendment No. 15 seeks to debar tribunal regulations from determining proceedings without a hearing in respect of any claim pertaining from grounds specified under any of the jurisdictions referred to in Clause 3(3) of this Bill, or indeed such other grounds as the Secretary of State shall prescribe by order following consultation with ACAS, and where the respondent denies liability. The system we propose will deliver swift and effective justice and help many claimants to receive redress early, potentially relieving them from hardship and uncertainty and will move other cases up the list. Respondents will also benefit from having cases determined at an early stage, freeing them to concentrate on their businesses. Amendment No. 15 would undermine the nature and purpose of the fast-track system, which we intend should be able to deal with cases including those where the respondent contests liability, and would act contrary to the best interests of all parties. It will always be open to the employment judge—the chairman—on his own initiative, of course, to decide whether a case, even if it falls into these jurisdictions, is better suited for a hearing with a full tribunal. The parties will always have the right to request a hearing. Rather than the amendment of the noble Lord being helpful to the Government, it is not want the Government intend.