I have been appearing before employment tribunals for over 30 years. Originally, when they were industrial tribunals, they were relatively informal. A casual observer today might well feel he is in the High Court or, on occasions, in the Old Bailey save for the absence of wigs.


This increasing formalisation is a denial of the purpose for which tribunals were created. Most barristers are suited only to an environment of legalistic pedantry - the antithesis of what tribunals are meant to be. The purpose is to resolve an employment dispute. There is no need for rules and regulations applicable to commercial litigation. For example, why are the tribunal members sat on high, as if in a magistrates' court? The parties and their advisers could sit around a desk, with the chairman leading an interrogatory role. The adversarial system is quite wrong in this context.



Unless there is a move away from this, tribunals might just as well be moved into a division of the High Court.



Ian Kay, Wembley, London