Pictured: Jane Cox

This week, the Government announced its intention to make two key changes to employment law. At the Conservative Party conference Chancellor George Osborne stated that the qualifying period of employment for claims of unfair dismissal will rise next April from one year to two years, and that for the first time, fees will be introduced for employment tribunal claims.

The Government claims that by increasing the qualifying period there will be up to 2000 fewer cases of unfair dismissal each year. Further estimations state that the change will save employers £6million per year, although they haven't provided much detail to back up this figure and that it will encourage businesses to take on more staff.

Apart from the brief reference to the introduction of fees in the Chancellor's speech, there have been no further official announcements providing any detail about the proposal, but reports suggest that consultation will begin in November with a likely implementation date of April 2013.

Media claims have detailed an initial issue fee when the claim is made of £250, a subsequent listing fee of £1000 if the case proceeds to a hearing and even higher fees if the employee is seeking compensation in excess of £30,000. However, there will be exemptions for those who can't afford to pay and we don't yet know whether the employer would have to pay the fees if they were to lose the case.

Jane Cox, Partner in the Employment team in the Birmingham office of Weightmans LLP said:

"I doubt that there are many employers in this country who would not welcome changes that reduce the number of tribunal claims meaning that businesses are not faced with the cost and inconvenience of defending cases. But is this want the proposed changes will achieve?"

"Clearly increasing the qualifying period will reduce unfair dismissal claims. However there is a whole variety of other claims that employees can pursue for which no minimum period of employment is required.

"Employees disgruntled with how they have been treated by their employer won't be put off but will instead allege some form of discrimination or link their case to whistle-blowing."

This type of claim is more complicated, takes more time to defend, involves longer hearings and as a result costs the employer much more, believes Jane: "Further compensation in claims of discrimination is unlimited whereas in unfair dismissal cases it is limited to £68,400."

Jane believes that fees would seem a better way in which to reduce claims, although critics suggest that they will simply prevent access to justice for genuine claimants who have been badly treated by their employer.

She adds:

"In the absence of detailed information we are left with many questions as to how the fees would work in practice. It has been suggested that claimants won't have to pay fees if they can't afford to. Who is going to make such an assessment?

"Employment tribunals are struggling to deal with their current workload and are not set up to deal with such an administrative burden. Further, given that the majority of claimants aren't employed when they lodge their claim the potential deterrent of a fee will be irrelevant - they won't be able to afford to pay and they will not be keen to find another job before their case has been heard if this means they will pay higher fees." 

Headlines speak volumes but the devil is in the detail. As part of the Government's Red Tape Challenge, the focus in October falls on employment law. Businesses have been called upon to help tackle employment law bureaucracy and suggest how regulations could be improved.

Jane believes there may be further changes to come:

"Although much of our legislation is covered by European law such that the Government's hands are tied, unfair dismissal law is not. This is one area where the Government could make some fundamental changes," she concludes.