Current Alternative Dispute Resolution Pilots
Jeremy Tickle, of the Tribunals Service Business Development Directorate, outlines the judicial mediation pilot currently being undertaken in the Employment Tribunal and the early neutral evaluation pilot being undertaken in the Social Security and Child Support Appeals Tribunal.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) – of which the Tribunals Service is part – has within its strategic and current business plans, undertakings to deliver alternative means of resolving disputes, outside of the courts and tribunals wherever possible. We hope that by offering Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) to our users we can improve the service we currently provide, whilst simultaneously delivering efficiency savings. The two pilots in the Employment Tribunal and the Social Security and Child Support Appeals (SSCSA) Tribunal, together with their subsequent evaluations will hopefully inform us whether that is the case.
Employment Tribunal Judicial Mediation Pilot
The employment tribunal pilot which began in August 2006 concluded its operational status in July 2007. The chosen ADR was Judicial Mediation. However the take up of judicial Mediation was lower than anticipated which meant the original completion date of March 2007 was extended to ensure adequate numbers of participants were available to enable the conduct of a robust, valid analysis and evaluation. The pilot targeted the more complex disability, sex and race discrimination cases and was run in three regions, London Central, Birmingham and Newcastle. In all 13 Chairmen were specially trained to deliver the Judicial Mediation in the three regions. Involvement in the pilot was entirely voluntary. Parties were free to refuse the offer of judicial mediation or to withdraw from the process at a later stage if they so wished. Anything discussed in the Judicial Mediation was confidential and excluded from any subsequent hearing where Judicial Mediation did not resolve the case. Inclusion in the pilot did not affect the parties’ opportunities for using the ACAS arbitration services and a delay was incorporated into the pilot Judicial Mediation process to allow for this.
Participants were assured that should the Judicial Mediation not resolve their dispute, the chairman who conducted the mediation would not be involved in any subsequent hearing.
The University of Westminster team who are currently evaluating the pilot, are due to produce their findings next month and these should be available in the Spring. The team’s report will be focusing primarily on the effectiveness, costs and user satisfaction of the pilot.
Social Security and Child Support Appeals Tribunal Early Neutral Evaluation Pilot
The SSCSA Tribunal pilot will run in two centres, Sutton and Bristol. The pilot began in Sutton in September and begins in Bristol in January 2008. The pilot is due to finish in September 2008. The pilot’s aim is to reduce the number of hearings (and potential adjournments) required in disability living allowance (DLA) appeals, whilst at the same time offering Appellants the opportunity to have their appeals resolved without the need for a full Hearing, which can be for some Appellants a particularly stressful event. Existing tribunal chairmen (District Chairmen (DC)) in the pilot locations provide an early neutral evaluation (ENE) service for the parties. Using this process, DLA cases are subjected to an early assessment on the papers so that an initial view of the likely case outcome can be obtained with the objective of securing earlier resolution. The DC then contacts the potential loser and it is then up to that party, either the Disability and Carers Service or the Appellant, to decide if they wish to act on the information provided by the DC. Alternatively the DC may issue directions which will then hopefully lead to cases being more fully prepared when they come to Hearing.
Cases are listed as normal and this means there is no delay for the Appellant if their case turns out to be not suitable for ENE or if the Appellant still wishes for their case to proceed to a Hearing.
As with the ET pilot, involvement is entirely voluntary. Not opting in or where ENE is unsuccessful will have no bearing on any subsequent hearing. In common with the ET pilot, the DC performing the ENE will have no further involvement in the appeal should it go to hearing. Stakeholders, including the DCS and Appellants’ representatives have been consulted and are members of the Pilot’s Steering Board. Despite widespread engagement take up is relatively low, currently running at about 30%. This appears to be a common issue with voluntary ADR schemes – has anyone experience of a higher level of take up in similar circumstances?
In common with the ET pilot the SSCSA Tribunal pilot is subject to independent evaluation of its effectiveness, cost and satisfaction with users. This will be conducted by a team from ECOTEC, a respected research company with a proven track record in dealing with similar projects, who will as part of the evaluation, conduct face to face interviews with Appellants and other stakeholders. Their report is due in December 2008.