Employment Tribunal (Amendment No.2) (Jersey) Regulations 201-: Lodging

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 on 5 August 2011:

Decision Reference: MD-S-2011-0061
Decision Summary Title :	DS - Tribunal Regulations Lodging		Date of Decision Summary:	5 August 2011
Decision Summary Author:	Policy Principal		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt?	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:	NA
Written Report Title :	WR - Tribunal Regulations Lodging		Date of Written Report:	5 August 2011
Written Report Author:	Policy Principal		Written Report : Public or Exempt?	Public
Subject: Lodge the Employment Tribunal (Amendment No. 2) (Jersey) Regulations 201-
Decision(s): The Minister decided to lodge ‘au Greffe’ for States debate the draft Employment Tribunal (Amendment No. 2) (Jersey) Regulations 201-.
Reason(s) for Decision: The proposed amendment would ensure that, in appointing members of the Jersey Employment Tribunal, the Minister acts in accordance with best practice as established by the Jersey Appointments Commission ‘Code of Practice for Appointments to Autonomous and Quasi-Autonomous Public Bodies and Tribunals’. Noting that the intended date of debate is the last States meeting before the October election, the Minister is satisfied that the amendment is not likely to be contentious in its principal purpose to reflect Jersey Appointments Commission best practice.
Resource Implications: There are no financial or manpower implications.
Action required: Policy Principal to request that the Greffier of the States arrange for the draft Regulations to be lodged ‘au Greffe’ by 9 August 2011 and for it to be listed for consideration by the States on 20 September 2011.
Signature:		Position: Minister
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Employment Tribunal (Amendment No.2) (Jersey) Regulations 201-: Lodging

Accompanying report to the Employment Tribunal (Amendment No. 2) (Jersey) Regulations 201-

Background

The Employment Tribunal (Jersey) Regulations 2007 were drafted in accordance with best practice and with tenure for other similar bodies at the time of their approval and were intentionally restrictive. However, certain provisions of the Regulations would have the unintended effect of preventing appointments that would be permitted in accordance with appropriate practice as specified by the Jersey Appointments Commission (JAC) ‘Code of Practice for Appointments to Autonomous and Quasi-Autonomous Public Bodies and Tribunals’.

The views of the Chairman of the JAC have been taken during the preparation of the proposed amendment.

Proposed amendments

The Regulations would be amended as follows:

The Employment Tribunal (Jersey) Regulations 2007 currently restrict Employment Tribunal appointments to two terms (for a maximum of five years per term) with no eligibility for an extension or re-appointment. To reflect best practice, the amendment would allow the Minister to further appoint members, subject to the process being overseen and conducted in accordance with JAC guidance (see Appendix 1). The code of practice specifies that the terms of office for members of upper tier bodies should not exceed ten years in total and it sets out the circumstances in which a further (second) re-appointment may be considered, such as if a member has served less than a total of 10 years in their first two terms. Further appointments would usually be subject to open recruitment, overseen by the JAC.

The Minister would be permitted to appoint one or more legally qualified ‘Acting Chairmen’ who could be appointed on short notice where both the Chairman and the Deputy Chairman are unable to perform their functions, such as where both are unavailable or conflicted. This is a significant risk in a small jurisdiction. The appointment of an Acting Chairman would occur in consultation with the JAC. The code of practice recognises that emergency appointments are sometimes necessary, but this would not be achievable under the current Regulations as only a Chairman and a Deputy Chairman may be appointed, plus a full JAC recruitment process would be required prior to any appointment.

A draft amendment to the Regulations was prepared that was intended to be progressed with the draft discrimination legislation. Accordingly the Minister wishes to apply the additional circumstances in which a member ceases to hold office.

Resource implications

There are no financial or manpower implications arising from this proposition.

APPENDIX 1

Jersey Appointments Commission (JAC) ‘Code of Practice for Appointments to Autonomous and Quasi-Autonomous Public Bodies and Tribunals’

Excerpt from 4.17 Terms and criteria for re-appointments

“(a) First re-appointments

First re-appointments (i.e., for a second term in office in the same role) may be made subject to satisfactory assessment of performance.

(b) Second re-appointments

Second re-appointments (i.e., for a third term in office in the same role) will be rare and can normally only be made if the individual has been considered alongside other applicants in open competition and has proved to be the most suitable candidate.

However, where the term of office of the member is comparatively short, i.e., not more than two years, the need to apply a competitive process can be delayed until the member has served six years.

4.18 Further, where one of the following criteria applies to the current postholder –

She or he has particular skills or experience essential to efficient functioning of the Body; or
She or he will provide continuity during a period of change (perhaps when a number of appointments are coming to an end simultaneously or bodies are merging); or
Experience has clearly shown difficulty in attracting candidates with the requisite knowledge and experience;

the Commission would consider approving an extension of the person’s membership of the Body without the requirement to carry out a competitive process. An approach should be made to the Commission to approve such a way forward before any action is taken.”