IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/brjirl/v52y2014i1p158-184.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Representation in UK Employment Tribunals: Analysis of the 2003 and 2008 Survey of Employment Tribunal Applications (SETA)

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Urwin
  • Franz Buscha
  • Paul L. Latreille

Abstract

The perception is that formal representation is increasingly common in UK Employment Tribunals (ETs), as case volumes and complexity increase. We investigate the nature of representation in UK ETs using the 2003 and 2008 Survey of Employment Tribunal Applications (SETA). The results suggest that between 2003 and 2008, the extent of formal claimant representation declined. The majority of employers and claimants are either heavily represented or have little/no representation, and there is little evidence that claimant representation is a response to employer representation at least at the level of individual claims. Overall, however, it would seem that some of the ‘accessible, informal and inexpensive’ characteristics envisaged by Donovan continue to apply only to cases within certain jurisdictions.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Urwin & Franz Buscha & Paul L. Latreille, 2014. "Representation in UK Employment Tribunals: Analysis of the 2003 and 2008 Survey of Employment Tribunal Applications (SETA)," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 52(1), pages 158-184, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:52:y:2014:i:1:p:158-184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-8543.2012.00914.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen Drinkwater & Peter Ingram, 2005. "Have Industrial Relations in the UK Really Improved?," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 19(2), pages 373-398, June.
    2. William Brown & Simon Deakin & David Nash & Sarah Oxenbridge, 2000. "The Employment Contract: From Collective Procedures to Individual Rights," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 38(4), pages 611-629, December.
    3. K. G. Knight & Paul L. Latreille, 2001. "Gender Effects in British Unfair Dismissal Tribunal Hearings," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 54(4), pages 816-834, July.
    4. Susan Corby & Paul Latreille, 2012. "Tripartite adjudication—an endangered species," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 94-109, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Laura William & Wim Vandekerckhove, 2023. "Fairly and Justly? Are Employment Tribunals Able to Even Out Whistleblowing Power Imbalances?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(2), pages 365-376, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. George Saridakis & Sukanya Sen‐Gupta & Paul Edwards & David J. Storey, 2008. "The Impact of Enterprise Size on Employment Tribunal Incidence and Outcomes: Evidence from Britain," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 46(3), pages 469-499, September.
    2. Zagelmeyer, Stefan, 2003. "Die Entwicklung kollektiver Verhandlungen in Großbritannien: ein historischer Überblick," Discussion Papers 17, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Chair of Labour and Regional Economics.
    3. Paul Latreille, 2017. "The economics of employment tribunals," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 331-331, January.
    4. Alex Bryson & P Willman, 2007. "Union Organization in Great Britain," CEP Discussion Papers dp0774, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    5. Seppo Honkapohja & Frank Westermann, 2009. "Pay-setting Systems in Europe: Ongoing Developments and Possible Reforms," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Seppo Honkapohja & Frank Westermann (ed.), Designing the European Model, chapter 3, pages 82-121, Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. Blanchflower, David G. & Bryson, Alex, 2008. "Union Decline in Britain," IZA Discussion Papers 3436, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. William Brown & Paul Ryan, 2003. "The Irrelevance of Trade Union Recognition? A Comparison of Two Matched Companies," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 6(3), pages 383-408, September.
    8. Stephen Drinkwater & Peter Ingram, 2005. "Have Industrial Relations in the UK Really Improved?," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 19(2), pages 373-398, June.
    9. Richard Jones & Peter Sloane, 2009. "Regional differences in job satisfaction," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(8), pages 1019-1041.
    10. Mark Harcourt & Helen Lam & Richard Croucher, 2015. "The right-to-manage default rule," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 222-235, May.
    11. James Arrowsmith & Paul Marginson, 2011. "Variable Pay and Collective Bargaining in British Retail Banking," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 49(1), pages 54-79, March.
    12. John Forth, 2008. "Conflict at Work: The Pattern of Disputes in Britain since 1980," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 316, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    13. Brown, W & Hudson, M & Deakin, S & Pratten, C, 2001. "The Limits of Statutory Trade Union Recognition," Working Papers wp199, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    14. Camille Signoretto & Julie Valentin, 2019. "Individual dismissals for personal and economic reasons in French firms: One or two models?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 241-265, October.
    15. Stephen Clibborn & Sally Hanna‐Osborne, 2023. "The employer perspective on wage law non‐compliance: State of the field and a framework for new understanding," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(4), pages 411-438, October.
    16. Drinkwater, Stephen & Latreille, Paul L. & Knight, Ben, 2008. "When It's (Mostly) the Taking Part that Counts: The Post-Application Consequences of Employment Tribunal Claims," IZA Discussion Papers 3629, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Chikako Oka, 2016. "Improving working conditions in garment supply chains: The role of unions in Cambodia," Post-Print hal-02952169, HAL.
    18. Gürtzgen, Nicole & Garloff, Alfred, 2008. "Innovationen in den Rahmenbedingungen von Tarifverhandlungen: Endbericht zum Projekt," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 110513.
    19. Anna Pollert & Andy Charlwood, 2009. "The vulnerable worker in Britain and problems at work," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 23(2), pages 343-362, June.
    20. Alex J. Wood, 2015. "Networks of injustice and worker mobilisation at Walmart," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 259-274, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:52:y:2014:i:1:p:158-184. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.