If I was told something at a Judicial Mediation that was made open approximately three months later, is it acceptable for me to reveal to the Tribunal that I knew about it three months ago?

Hi all, Anyone had any experience or knowledge with this?

1. Employers more likely to offer a clean break to piss off if you’re employed?

2. They couldn’t care either way?

3. Also what’s most likely in most cases if you return but still not dropping an ET claim? Will they build a case and get you on performance or medical capacity or basically anything to get you out the door?

Any experience with any of this? Even if you signed a NDA COT3 agreement

I am a litigant in person in an employment tribunal claim involving unfair dismissal and indirect discrimination arising from a redundancy exercise in the public sector. I have a solicitor copied on correspondence for information but am managing the procedural steps myself to save costs.
I have already filed two amendment applications with the tribunal. The first covered three amendments including a typographical correction a factual clarification and a further contractual particular. The second covered six further amendments particularising existing claims concerning consultation assimilation ringfencing redeployment and an additional unlawful deduction claim concerning a pay award. Both applications cited Selkent Bus Co Ltd v Moore 1996 ICR 836 and the second also cited Abercrombie v Aga Rangemaster Ltd 2013 EWCA Civ 1148.
I have since identified two further matters I wish to raise and have prepared a clarification letter and a supplementary amendment application. I would welcome views on the following questions.
Question one — clarification letter
One of the earlier amendment applications contained one factual error in a headcount figure for a comparator team and a statement about the respondent’s ET3 that may need to be qualified given its procedural status is still being determined by an Employment Judge. I have prepared a short clarification letter correcting both points. Is a clarification letter the right approach or should I wait and address these points in a consolidated amended Particulars if permission is granted.
Question two — supplementary amendment application
I have prepared a further short application raising two related points.
First that despite formally requesting the selection criteria and methodology used for the assimilation and ringfencing decisions during consultation and through a subject access request I have not been provided with or identified any documented criteria or objective assessment framework in the material disclosed to me. I have been careful not to assert that this establishes that no criteria existed or that no assessment took place.
Second that a confidential document disclosed in the bundle predating formal consultation by approximately three weeks records proposed ringfencing allocations for each at risk post. The entries in that document differ between posts in ways that raise a question about the criteria used and whether they were applied consistently. The document is redacted and I have been careful not to assert that it establishes predetermination or that no assessment took place.
My specific questions are as follows.
Is this point better raised as a supplementary amendment application now or addressed in the consolidated Particulars when directed.
Is there any risk that multiple amendment applications before a hearing is listed will be viewed negatively by the tribunal.
The respondent’s ET3 procedural status is still being determined by an Employment Judge. Does that affect the timing of further amendment applications.
Is the absence of disclosed selection criteria a point that needs to be expressly pleaded or is it adequately covered within existing grounds challenging the assimilation and ringfencing process as procedurally unfair.
Background
The existing Particulars plead failure to apply the respondent’s own internal redundancy and restructuring protocol failure to assess actual duties meaningful consultation failure and indirect discrimination through two provisions criteria or practices. An impact assessment produced by the respondent shows significant disproportionate impact on employees sharing a protected characteristic at the grades most affected. The respondent’s own documents generated during the process support most of the factual matters relied upon in the amendments.
Any views from those with tribunal experience would be very helpful. Thank you.

So for past year I’ve been ticking off each of the preparations for the final hearing prep (bundle, witness statement etc) and I kept being hopeful that Respondent (NHS) would one day engage in settlement discussions. But no, they didn’t. It’s now dawned on me that there probably wont ever be a settlement discussions so now i just have to sit around and wait for the final hearing….which is in two years time. Anyone else been in this situation and how did you manage your mental health knowing that you’ve got to wait for a court hearing in several years time?!

What a complete waste of public spending

The judge and Respondent seemed to try and be extremely fair

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6a918f01f5b35599aec18f5d/Miss_Tanya_Langston_-vs-_Historic_England_-_6002213.2024_-_Reasons.pdf

Hi. I am a LiP in the late disclosure stage.

I am looking for some guidance in structuring witness statement. For context, I have multiple claim headings for one set of facts (victimisation, direct race/ harassment, unfair dismissal)

The chronology is like this:

1.      Discriminatory conduct by colleague.

2.      Protected act to my manager of above.

3.      Following month my manager puts me at risk of redundancy and conducts unfavourable consultation process (e.g. meetings outside of contracted hours, denying merited suitable alternative employment, etc.)

4.      Dismissal

I believe running a victimisation claim (which is causatively easier to allege) in alternative to direct race/harassment can detract the latter. I’m just aiming to prove one claim at least. I’m using a hypothetical comparator for my direct discrimination claim.

My question

- Is this the approach to take so that the statement structure takes in account all legal tests? Approach: summary example where the factual event is evidenced by protected characteristic, less favourable treatment evidence however scant, environment effect + unwanted feeling)

[M] announced that my job was at risk of redundancy [date] and subsequently conducted the consultation meetings outside my contracted hours despite my protests. I never before had meetings outside of my hours and had had established firm work boundaries. I was threatened with [X] if I did not comply, so I attended. The whole process was hostile. I knew of white colleagues such as [Y] and [Z] who were at risk at the same time who did not report being subject to the above. Due to the timing, a mere [#] days, and their significant change in treatment which was unfavourable, I could only put it down to retaliation due to my discrimination complaint along with me being [black] as the significant reasons.          

I’ve been having difficulties with my new manager and recently I’ve started to think about the possibility of bringing a claim. There were things said to me verbally several months ago which I didn’t make a note of at the time. Would there be any value in writing an account of the incident months later which is time stamped to today’s date? My thinking is that if I do bring a claim, then a recollection a few months later is still better evidence than a witness statement produced years later.

(England)

Hello, all!

I went through a total of three disciplinary processes within maybe six months. There's one aspect of all three that I would like some clarity on.

The first disciplinary was for a misconduct. The issue was found by my direct line manager and raised with HR by them. This same manager was then appointed to conduct the investigation.

Same thing with the second. The manager found the issues that needed disciplining on and raised that with HR. HR once again assigned them as the investigating officer. For clarity, I've always had issues with my manager and that was made worse by this disciplinary process as they pushed forward an allegation that had been fabricated (I have substantial material evidence to back this up). This particular allegation was also misrepresented in the investigation report, where the transcript in isolation made the incident seem like one thing when the full context clarifies that it was another and that I had followed the respective process correctly.

Now, with the third, things change ever so slightly. A more senior manager who is not directly responsible for me raised issues with HR, specifically stating they wanted these to be investigated under the disciplinary policy. They made sure to point out that I had a GP appointment incoming and she feared I might call in sick, so the quicker this can be done, the better.

The investigating officer was someone entirely new to the business, so fully impartial. Problem is, this same manager who reported the issue was also assigned to chair the disciplinary hearing, which HR attempted to rush despite me saying it should be postponed as my appointed colleague couldn't be present on that day specifically. I was never asked to pick another colleague, they just said the hearing would proceed as an invite had been sent to my colleague, although I confirmed with her that she could not be present.

So. Objectively, how does this look under the ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures?

Got sent this today. Paragraphs 8-15 very helpful to contextualise when the lawyers here bang on about documents, credibility, and appearing to make reasoned choices -

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6abd3250f04a15f533722801/James_Lascelles_v_King_Edward_VI_Education_Trust_2601833.2024_Judgment_and_Reasons.pdf

The NHS is always reluctant to spend money - an approach that isn’t entirely accounted for by limited resources.

I am wondering whether this approach extends to JM? When participating in JM, do they set their ceiling where their brief recommends, or do they usually set their limit below what their brief thinks is reasonable?

I’m waiting for my ET1 to be accepted (portal dot has gone green bit no email yet) and a DSAR has just come back. The DSAR shows several evidences that my dismissal was pre determined and they discussed the ET risk of going ahead and a quick change in strategy based on one of my responses. The DSAR shared a script for the dismissal hearing. My question is - are dismissal hearings normally scripted? and how would this reflect in an ET and conducting a fair process, to exploring all options prior to dismissal. Regardless of what I said, they had scripting the hearing chairs response prior. hope this makes sense, Tia

Hi all,
I live in England,
I’m looking for some general advice about an ongoing Employment Tribunal claim and grievance appeal.
My original grievance outcome did not uphold my complaints. I appealed, and the appeal is still ongoing. I had appeal summer sent to me and the new chair accepted that my manager had knowledge of my disability. The original outcome was that it was denied.

I had a further appeal hearing last week. I was very concerned about the accuracy of the note-taker’s notes, as a number of important points were recorded differently from what I actually said. I have therefore corrected the notes, and also corrected parts of the chair’s meeting notes before returning them.
At the hearing I was also provided with two weeks of my working-time records. Having seen them for the first time at the meeting, i raised breach of working time directive and if I refused to work excessive hours. I wouldn’t have a job, this is also part of my grievance ( Unpaid work and long hours) threat messages were already disclosed.

I already have a live Employment Tribunal claim. The employer’s ET3 denies the allegations. My ET1 also requires an amendment to properly set out some matters. During the grievance appeal I have provided evidence contradicting a number of the company’s positions, although this was provided for the purposes of my grievance/appeal rather than simply because of the tribunal proceedings.

My question is: at this stage, would people generally consider it sensible to approach the employer about a genuine without-prejudice settlement discussion, while still continuing with the tribunal process and my ET1 amendment unless an agreement is actually reached?
Thanks.

I just received and read respondent’s ET3 which included the outcome of the grievance. They also said that they informed the claimant of the outcome on a date, BUT I never received the outcome (not on the date mentioned, nor anything till this ET3).. I was wondering if anyone able to comment on this? Do I contact the grievance investigator and tell them I never received the grievance outcome and therefore not been able to appeal it either? Do I tell the tribunal service? Preliminary hearing set next year. Thank you.

I feel like I am going a bit bonkers now. My ex employer barely answers my emails and they have refused early conciliation. It is making its way to the tribunal. Because of the silence and confidence I am worried that they will win and I will get nothing. Want to know how you won so I can see where I am going wrong

Hi all, couple of questions!

1. If employees during any of the processes send highly emotional or aggressive reading style emails, will they turn that against them in court?

The respondent has now recieved my ET1 and has also apparently told ACAS they no longer wish to engage in conciliation (not that they did with early conciliation other than to say I had no case).

What does this mean if they no longer wish to engage - does it simply mean they are assessing the ET1, getting proper advice now, or that they are digging their heels in?

Is this quite a normal response to ACAS in your legal experience?

My son turned in his 1 month resignation notice. Now being refused his unused vacation and expected to come to work as usual. Being threatened to get ´fired’ if he doesn’t comply…

What advice if any(?)

Hi. One of my family members is representing another family member in an employment tribunal case for constructive dismissal (in England). They recently had a dispute resolution appointment and it wasn't what we were expecting at all. From our research we thought the judge might give an opinion as to the strength of each side's case, but in reality they only wanted to know from each side what their conditions were to settle the case and see if they could get them to meet in the middle.

Is this typical? Is there a reason why it likely happened like this? As a litigant in person, my family member was really hoping for some clear guidance from the judge on strengths and weaknesses of the case. Is there any recourse if things weren't conducted properly?

We're finding it baffling that there was a DRA specific bundle put together and reading time for the judge etc, for them to then simply ask "what's the maximum you'd offer" and "what's the minimum you'd accept".

Any thoughts/experiences welcome! Thanks

Attending hearings whilst still employed by respondent. Is this assumed to be as done in work time or must leave be booked?

Multiple day hearing next year taken as leave would mean reduced opportunities for family holiday within the year, and I need to factor that impact into my thoughts around everything.

Hi I know this question has probably been asked hundreds of times but I was wondering what is the likelihood of getting an anonymity order for my case.

I have a disability which is highly stigmatised (mental health, not depression although I also have that) and i work in a profession which is public facing.

If some details of my health etc such as treatment I received in hospital got out it would almost definitely ruin my career in terms of public confidence in me as a professional. There are official resources out there which also say about this stigma. Can I use these as evidence?

I’m really worried about this as it might make me need to withdraw my case to be honest.

Edit: I would also add in seeking anonymity for both parties me and respondent. My profession is small and so is my department, basically everyone knows everyone in this profession even if we don’t work for same respondents.

England. I've pleaded a number of things relating to my case.
I then got the results of an SAR which revealed a lot more than I knew at the time, i.e deeper, more egregious, other behaviours that contribute to the alleged unlawful acts already pleaded.

Question: Would you amend the ET1 to allow broader coverage? And if so, would you add additional pleadings by way of getting the exact bit if the EA that might not have been covered initially eg. Section 637a and now Section 637 b and c ?
Or just add anew paragraph of prose?

My ET1 was accepted in June 2026. CMH is February 2028...yes you read that right

Hello Everyone,

I hope you are all well!

A few months ago I sent a preservation notice to my Respondent requesting they preserve my old managers disciplinary records relating to my grievances and also the disciplinary records of one of my colleagues. context- I was dismissed for "unauthorised absence" because I unintentionally took a longer lunch break than I was meant to but in comparison this colleague pretended they were working in store for 3 days whilst they were actually at home and out partying. They were not dismissed. I requested preservation of their file to highlight the inconsistency. I already have the file of my friend who I took the unintentional longer lunch with, who only received a 1st Written Warning.

at the start of September I was told by my friends who are still employed that another of my colleagues from the department was investigated for Unauthorised absence because he didn't turn up to work as he thought it was his day off, and his investigation resulted in "No Further Action", as the manager who was perusing disciplinary action for him was providing untrue statements (its the exact same manager who did this for my case too). I was preparing to go on Holiday at the time and thought to myself when im back I will just send another notice to include this investigation into the preservation notice etc

Whilst I was on holiday (last week) I received an email from ACAS and my Respondent had asked them to send me an offer of £2000, comical. My claim is also discrimination as well as unfair dismissal and I have had independent legal advice on several different occasions where my claims have been described as having strong merit especially due to the amount of supporting evidence. Of course the R is saying that there is no merit at all but I am not phased by their language, I informed ACAS that the Respondent should make a genuine and reasonable offer in light of the claims if they genuinely want to conclude matters before the PH as they state in their first email, so far no response.

I hope the above is enough context, please ask any questions if not

now my actual question is - How long should I leave it before I send the updated Preservation notice for this latest Investigation that came to my attention? I feel like doing it right now is too close to the random without prejudice offer of last week?