REPRESENTATION: Acas research discovers concerns about getting access to legal advice


Employment discrimination claimants face a 'postcode lottery' when it comes to finding and funding appropriate legal representation, research by the Advisory Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas) has revealed.



The report, Sexual orientation and religion or belief discrimination in the workplace, assessed the impact of anti-discrimination regulations introduced in 2003. Researchers examined 470 employment tribunal (ET) cases alleging sexual orientation discrimination and 461 cases alleging discrimination on grounds of religion or belief.



According to the report, published earlier this month, claimants expressed concern over access to legal advice. It also said that unrepresented parties lacked confidence in dealing with the opposing party and handling their claim. Finance was a 'significant barrier' to representation.



Ben Savage, the report's author, told the Gazette: 'Where free advice or representation is available, it is usually in London and other large conurbations, which results in a sort of postcode lottery.'



He said this was exacerbated by problems with accessing specialist lawyers: 'People need representatives to be knowledgeable about employment law and specialists are not always available - especially in rural areas.'



Barry Clarke, chairman of the Employment Lawyers Association (ELA) and a partner at national firm Russell Jones & Walker, said representation problems were likely to be more acute in the private sector because the public sector 'tends to have greater union membership'.



He added that solicitors often have problems securing finance from third-party insurance companies. He noted that 'big money' cases tended to involve discriminatory dismissal and so attract awards for loss of future earnings. Conversely, most ET discrimination cases are brought while employees are still employed, so damages are awarded for injured feelings only.



Richard Fox, chairman of the ELA's tribunal monitoring party and head of employment at City firm Kingsley Napley, said: 'Discrimination claims are more complex than straightforward unfair dismissal claims... organisations have been set up to deal with these situations, such as ELA's pro bono initiative or the bar's free representation unit.'



He added that if claimants could not afford to pay for a solicitor, firms can take work on a contingency fee basis, as ET work is classed as non-contentious.



Anita Rice