Categories:Employment,UK

Redundancy consultation knocks Addleshaws' Manchester employment team

  • Print
  • Comments (5)

Readers' comments (5)

  • Employment law in secular bear market? Discuss.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • That's some seriously impressive PEP.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It's worrying at the moment as the introduction of fees seems to have greatly reduced claims which means there are fewer cases to defend. I have heard that the Employment Tribunals have received up to 75% fewer claims year on year (to date), which means there will be a massive impact on employment litigators unless the access to justice problem is resolved.

    A lot of non-contentious work is being conducted in-house at the moment as well, which means that there is a decline in this area.

    The last few years have been very busy but the work moving forward looks to be in decline.

    Employment lawyers should not vote Tory.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Yes they should - just imagine all the advice they will be asked for in advance of a referendum on withdrawal from the EU.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Well the solution's obvious. Defendant employment firms will have to secretly set up and fund an organisation that pays the application fees of would be claimants!

    Ironically, it would, as being in the widest sense for the relief of poverty, probably qualify as a charity so they could get tax relief on donations to it - a win win situation.

    Though for once it might be sensible not to advertise to all and sundry how charitable they were being!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (5)