Increase in Tribunal Awards

CONTENTS
1. Increase in Tribunal Awards
2. Addition to previous bulletin - O'Neill v HSBC Bank

________________________________________

1. Increase in Tribunal Awards

It's that time of the year again. The Employment Rights (Increase of Limits) Order 2001 (SI 2001/21) has just been publised, setting out the annual increase in the limits for tribunal awards (which are now linked to increases in the Retail Price Index under the Employment Relations Act 1999).

The most important increases are:
'A week's pay' for a basic award or redundancy payment - £240pw (was £230pw)

Maximum compensatory award for unfair dismissal - £51,700 (was £50,000)
The new limits come into force on 1st February 2001. For unfair dismissal cases, the effective date of termination (rather than the date of the hearing) must be on or after 1st February 2001. The Regulations set out the transitional provisions for other types of claim.

I attach a copy of the Order to this Email (HTML format, reproduced with permission of Her Majesty's Stationery Office), which contains the full list of increases.
________________________________________

2. Addition to Previous Bulletin

The bulletin on 9th January 2001 contained a summary of O'Neill v HSBC Bank (on justification under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 regarding performance related bonus schemes).

I have received the following message from Sue Ashtiany of Morgan Cole. She says (reproduced with her permission):

"I notice that you have noted O'Neill in which I appeared for the bank. There is an important point of correction which you should also note.

"The respondent bank admitted that O'Neill was disabled (for the purpose of this case) and that the scheme discriminated against him within the meaning of section 5(1), but NOT that it discriminated against disabled people generally within the meaning of section 5(2) so as to give rise to a duty to make reasonable adjustments under section 6(1). This was an important plank of the alternative argument, which the tribunal accepted. So the case is maybe even a little more interesting than at first sight."