Skip to main content Skip to accessibility
This website is not compatible with your web browser. You should install a newer browser. If you live in Jersey and need help upgrading call the States of Jersey web team on 440099.
Government of Jerseygov.je

Information and public services for the Island of Jersey

L'înformâtion et les sèrvices publyis pouor I'Île dé Jèrri

Jersey Employment Tribunal - Annual Report 2010

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

  • demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision

  • providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 6 October 2010 regarding: Jersey Employment Tribunal - Annual Report 2010.

Decision Reference: MD-S-2010-0056

Decision Summary Title :

DS JET Annual Report 2010

Date of Decision Summary:

14 September 2010

Decision Summary Author:

Policy Principal

Decision Summary:

Public or Exempt?

Public

Type of Report:

Oral or Written?

Written

Person Giving

Oral Report:

N/A

Written Report

Title :

WR JET Annual Report 2010

Date of Written Report:

9 September 2010

Written Report Author:

Chairman, Jersey Employment Tribunal

Written Report :

Public or Exempt?

Public

Subject: Jersey Employment Tribunal Annual Report, for the period 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010

Decision(s): The Minister decided to present to the States the Jersey Employment Tribunal’s Annual Report, for the period 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010.

Reason(s) for Decision: Regulation 10 of the Employment Tribunal (Jersey) Regulations, 2005, requires the Social Security Minister to lay a copy of the Employment Tribunal's Annual Report before the States no later than four months after the date to which the report relates.

The Minister received the Annual Report from the Chairman of the Tribunal, David Le Quesne, and is grateful to the Chairman, Deputy Chairman, Side Members and to the Tribunal Secretary for their commitment to the Employment Tribunal throughout the past year.

Resource Implications: There are no financial or manpower implications.

Action required: Minister to present the annual report to the States in conjunction with the Greffier of the States. Policy Principal to provide copies for distribution to States Members and Officers by the States Greffe, and to the media and other interested parties.

Signature: 

Position:

Minister

Date Signed: 

Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Jersey Employment Tribunal - Annual Report 2010

Jersey

Employment

Tribunal  
 

Annual Report 2010  
 

This fifth annual report covers the period from 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010. 

Applications to the Jersey Employment Tribunal  

The Jersey Employment Tribunal received 169 applications during the period; this is a decrease of 18 compared to the previous year.  The spread of applications continues to reflect the diversity of Jersey’s employment sector, rather than being confined to one particular industry.  

Outcomes of Tribunal Applications  

Unless a party indicates that s/he does not want conciliation, all applications and responses are forwarded to the Jersey Advisory and Conciliation Service (JACS). The Employment Tribunal actively encourages both parties to meet an Officer of JACS. Cases only come to the Tribunal if no conciliated settlement has been reached.  

The 169 applications were dealt with in the following manner;- 

Rejected

 

5

Dismissed

 

2

Continuing

 

95

Settled

 

47

Withdrawn

 

5

Struck Out

 

1

Found in favour

Applicant

11

 

Respondent

3

 

Total

169

 
 
 
 
 

The status of outstanding cases from previous years is as follows: 

2005 - One case remains outstanding pending the outcome of a Royal Court Hearing. 

2006 - None 

2007 - None 

2008 - 2 cases remain outstanding. 3 cases have been stayed 

Year 2009 (to 30 June 2009) - 8 cases remain outstanding and are at various stages of the Tribunal process.  This does not include outstanding cases from previous years as shown above. 
 

Breakdown of Issues contained in Applications 

Most of the cases coming before the Tribunal continue to relate to unfair dismissal and payment of wages. The figures below however do not include additional issues identified during the course of the hearing. In some cases more than one issue applied at the time of registration. 

Issues identified in Applications

Number

Unfair Dismissal

139

Payment of wages

80

Holiday Pay / Rest Periods

47

Termination of Employment

73

No Contract

23

Breach of Contract

3

Minimum Wage

2

No Wage slips

8

Total number of issues

375

 
 

Number of Cases Heard 

The Tribunal sat on 87 occasions and held 61 hearings and 26 Interim hearings during the period. In relation to the hearings, the Tribunal found in favour of the parties as follows: The Applicant was successful in 18 cases and the Respondent was also successful in 18 cases. The balance of the cases were resolved by way of settlement or withdrawal, or were struck out during the hearing.  

The Tribunal endeavours to bring matters to a full hearing within 26 weeks of the claim being accepted. In the majority of cases this is achieved. It is only in exceptional circumstances, or by mutual consent that hearings are delayed, i.e. where issues are the subject of proceedings in Court, unavailability of witnesses, etc. 

Preliminary Hearings are used increasingly to determine matters such as whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction, whether the claimant is an employee of the alleged employer, identifying the issues for determination, disclosure issues and many other areas where preliminary determinations may lead to a fair and efficient hearing. These are conducted at the request of either of the parties or at the direction of the Chairman or Deputy Chairman.

 

Discrimination Law 

In preparation for discrimination legislation, Tribunal members have already undertaken training. However, implementation of the law has been delayed again this year due to budget constraints.   

It is understood that there has been no change to earlier proposals that when the law does come into force, the Employment Tribunal would hear discrimination claims relating to employment, and might also hear claims relating to any aspect of discrimination.  

Although it is impossible to gauge with any accuracy the additional workload that the discrimination legislation would bring to the Tribunal, my deputy and I believe that the Tribunal would have the capacity, in terms of time, manpower and premises, to deal with any aspect of discrimination. It is generally recognised that discrimination claims should be heard in the same relatively informal manner as employment claims and therefore the Tribunal might reasonably be regarded as the most suitable forum for all discrimination matters. This should save costs, for it would use an existing and experienced tribunal. 

Should the Home Affairs Minister, and ultimately the States, wish the Tribunal to hear all discrimination claims, rather than only claims relating to discrimination in employment, we believe that this would be feasible.  
 

Unfair Dismissal Awards  

Until October 2009, the Employment Law provided a set formula (based on a scale relating to length of service and weekly pay) for the calculation of unfair dismissal awards and the Tribunal could not reduce an award due to an employee’s actions or conduct leading up to the dismissal.  

The Law has been amended and the Tribunal now has the power to reduce the compensation that an employer is ordered to pay where the employee has contributed to his or her own dismissal.  The amendment, which is not retrospective, will also give the Tribunal the power to order the re-employment of an unfairly dismissed employee, instead of a financial award. 

Only one case has so far been the subject of such reduction on the successful application of the Respondent. The Tribunal concluded that the Applicant’s behaviour contributed directly to her dismissal and the Tribunal decided that in this case it was just and equitable to reduce the amount of the Applicant’s compensation for unfair dismissal by 65%. 
 

Training 

All the members of the Tribunal undertake additional training from time to time. With the introduction of new employment legislation, it is imperative that the members stay abreast of developments in employment relations and discrimination in the workplace, all of which will impact on the scope of the issues coming before the Tribunal in the future. The members will receive further training on redundancy legislation later this year, before the new statutory right to a redundancy payment comes into force.  
 

Tribunal Members  

I am grateful for the commitment of the Tribunal members. The time spent in hearings probably is about half the time the members actually spend on each case. The documents are studied before each hearing and when the hearing is finished the panel discusses and examines in detail the evidence before making its decision. Thereafter, the chairman or deputy chairman provides a draft judgment for the panel members to correct and amend before publication. All too often, the Tribunal convenes to hear a case only to find that one of the parties does not appear, and of course by that stage it is too late to arrange for another case to be heard by that panel. This is hard on panel members who may have taken holiday time or time off work to attend and who have spent their own time reading the papers. 

There are currently four vacancies on the Tribunal for two employer representatives and two employee representatives.  Recruitment will be undertaken later in 2010 to fill these positions. 

Tribunal secretary

 

John Mallet has retired as secretary to the Tribunal. He was there at the beginning, and it was largely due to his organization and patience that we now have a tribunal which runs smoothly. John co-ordinated and provided first drafts for many of the Tribunal documents and devised the system which operates from the time a complaint is received to delivery of the judgment to the parties. Above all, John’s firm yet kind management of the parties to employment disputes has set the hallmark on the Tribunal’s approach: we try throughout the process to match fairness with compassion. We are sad to see John go, and wish him well. 

A replacement has been found, Louise Cave. Louise currently works in the Viscount’s department, so she has useful experience. We look forward to working with her.

Responsibility for the Tribunal

 

Hitherto, the responsibility for the Tribunal, including budgetary responsibility, has been with the Minister for Social Security. We have had much help and support from Kate Morel at the Department of Social Security. As of 1 August 2010, the responsibility for our administration will come under the aegis of the Judicial Greffier. This is a logical change, for those who are responsible of administering the courts have the experience to administer the Tribunal, which is simply another branch of the justice system in Jersey. 
 
 
 
 
 

Employment Tribunal Chairman

September 2010

 

Appendix 1 – Employment Tribunal Side Members  

Employer Representatives  

Mrs Susan Armes

Mrs Mary Curtis

Mrs Kelly Flageul

Mr Stewart Mourant

Mrs Carol Harvey

Mr Peter Woodward

Mr Mark Therin

(1 position vacant1) 
 

Employee Representatives  

Mr Patrick Kirwan

Mr Samuel Le Breton

Mr James McCartan

Mr Alan Hall

Mr Timothy Langlois

Mr Michael Baudains

(2 positions vacant) 
Appendix 2 –Employment Tribunal Activity – 1 July 2008 2009 to 30 June 2009 2010  
 

 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 

 

Note: Of the 169 applications received during the period 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010, 11 cases were found in favour of applicants and 3 in favour of respondents. Of all cases heard by the Tribunal during the same period (which includes cases that have carried forward from previous years) 18 cases were found in favour of the Applicant and 18 were found in favour of the Respondent.

1 As of 1 July 2010, one additional employer representative position is vacant.

 

 

Back to top
rating button