Discrimination paid off with money to leave job

Trainspotter said:

I have had legal advice  to  accept the offer as otherwise I could end up with nothing if the tribunal thought the offer was fair, a chance I am not prepared to take.

I do not believe this is correct. The discussions and the resulting offer made to you were presumably on a without prejudice basis (which is why you have been told that conversation was "protected"), meaning that neither you nor your employer can bring this up at any point in a tribunal, unless both parties agree to it. Thus, there is no way a tribunal will have an opportunity to say that the offer was fair and award you nothing. I don't know who gave you this advice (i.e. whether they were actually a legal professional specialising in employment law) but, from my own experience with the tribunal, they are not correct in saying this. If the union said this, then I think what they meant was that the fact that you have received an offer means that they are under no obligation to provide you with representation in the tribunal, which I think makes unions completely useless (mine was like that as well).

Taking the matter to a tribunal would put your employer under a microscope in the public eye, which is what they deserve, but it will also take its toll on you. Also, initiating a trbunal case may prompt your employer to offer you a better settlement.

Please do not accept the offer before really thinking about it. You have to add up how much you will have lost (2.5 years of salary plus how much pension you will lose for having to retire early, assuming to live to a certain age plus extra money for hurt feelings, etc.). Does that amount compare with how much you are being offered? If not, don't accept the offer.

If you go to a tribunal, it will cost you nothing, because they have abolished the fees. Also. if you decide to stay in your job, they will have a difficult time getting rid of you. Please consider this, not just for yourself, but for those who will come after you.

I think the advice given to Trainspotter was likely that he could end up with nothing if the matter went to Tribunal, as this is always a risk in any case (that the Tribunal may not uphold your claims and therefore award you nothing).

With regards to the offer being fair, this is a separate issue whereby the employer can end up with grounds to claim their costs against the Claimant if an offer is rejected and then the Claimant is awarded less by the Tribunal (as explained in my comment above). Without prejudice discussions can be disclosed to the Tribunal when a costs application is made, and this can be the decision of the party disclosing them. I know this through very recent personal experience.

Going to Tribunal will only cost you nothing if you do not use legal representation and you do not get costs awarded against you, so all decisions about what to do with a settlement offer have to be weighed up in against what you may end up getting out of an actual hearing.

NAS36609 said:

Without prejudice discussions can be disclosed to the Tribunal when a costs application is made, and this can be the decision of the party disclosing them. I know this through very recent personal experience.

That is exactly the advice I was given.  And this, on top of the zero pounds I could receive if I did go to Tribunal and lost, or if I was awarded a sum less than that offered and, in either case costs awarded against me is not a risk I am prepared to take.  I have my principles, and it feels like betraying my cause, but I have to think practicalities.

I did not ask for this result at all. The sum has been raised as I kept rejecting the previous one.  And to get offered a sum so I can be dismissed from my job  when I feel I have done nothing wrong and am the aggrieved party is a very great injustice in my opinion.  What I had asked for is acknowledgement that the employer had done wrong - and the CEO has admitted this in a 'protected conversation', and some nominal damages to show they are truly sorry.  I do not know where the 'buying my job' from me has come from.  And as such with all this, as originally stated, the employer then becomes free to do the same thing to someone else in order to dismiss them unlawfully with no stain on their character (or in the case of my employer, they will be able to bid for the contract to the commissioners appearing to treat their employees well).

I believe this to be similar to cases in care homes where the residents have been abused and offered some payment to move elsewhere when someone complained.  Then the home is able to abuse more residents.

I cannot for the life of me think this is how the law was intended to operate.  Where anyone who lodges a complaint, however justified, is simply paid off in order for the employer to carry on with the same discrimination of disabled people with absolutely no stain on their business.

As Mr Bumble said 'The law's a bottom' (or was it 'The law's a donkey'!)  Or as Ian Hislop said 'if this is justice, then I'm a banana'.

I quite agree with you Trainspotter, and in my case the employer has not only managed to exploit the Employment Tribunal system, but that of the civil courts too, in order to not comply with our settlement agreement. It’s a complete nonsense and a gross injustice. 

I’m still exploring ways to resolve my situation, though I’ve really run out of money for legal costs, I’m facing a costs award against me, and the law could not enforce parts of my settlement agreement. I still want the employer to learn a lesson and apologise to me though, which were my only goals from the outset of my claim. 

It’s all so frustrating and unfair, after all we are not the ones who should be getting punished!

I quite agree with you Trainspotter, and in my case the employer has not only managed to exploit the Employment Tribunal system, but that of the civil courts too, in order to not comply with our settlement agreement. It’s a complete nonsense and a gross injustice. 

I’m still exploring ways to resolve my situation, though I’ve really run out of money for legal costs, I’m facing a costs award against me, and the law could not enforce parts of my settlement agreement. I still want the employer to learn a lesson and apologise to me though, which were my only goals from the outset of my claim. 

It’s all so frustrating and unfair, after all we are not the ones who should be getting punished!