Murray 17
Well-known member
- Jul 6, 2003
- 2,159
Which 'us' would that be?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
The WORKERS Party now in compete disarray
- Thread starter Ernest
- Start date
melias shoes
Well-known member
- Oct 14, 2010
- 4,830
Yep including free uni places....oh wait a minute.
A fantastic thing if you are one of the many individuals who abuse the system by making spurious claims against employers using no win/no fee solicitors. Terrible news if you are a small business that simply cant afford to be taken advantage of in this way. Great news, of course, if you are an individual making a genuine claim against a genuinely bad employer.
But why is it beyond the wit of man to come up with a way of stopping the serial claimants looking for a free ride at the expense of others whilst protecting the genuine worker who has been 'abused' and the genuine employer who is creating work but gets nothing but hassle and expense for his/her efforts?
Biscuit Barrel
Well-known member
It was a fully costed manifesto (carried out by Diane Abbott).
Wrong-Direction
Well-known member
- Mar 10, 2013
- 13,422
Yeah but the general public and generally morons so..
Sent from my SM-A310F using Tapatalk
melias shoes
Well-known member
- Oct 14, 2010
- 4,830
No they didn't. Fake news.
Publius Ovidius
Well-known member
It's about time we swept the feckers away and brought in a hard left Stalinist government.
Everything else has failed.
We need gulags and huge tractor factories!
Everything else has failed.
We need gulags and huge tractor factories!
Except for the wealthy companies who currently get many of the ''Freebies''
Hastings gull
Well-known member
- Nov 23, 2013
- 4,635
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,254
Which was equally relevant under the system where a fee needed to be paid before a tribunal started. Just that the pay-offs included that fee.
larus
Well-known member
Is that the same as his promise to refund all of the existing students debts that he made during the election which he has now gone back on?
What a complete f*cking liar he is. He conned so many of the yoof to vote for him. Typical Labour lies.
Ernest
Stupid IDIOT
- Thread starter
- #36
Is that the same as his promise to refund all of the existing students debts that he made during the election which he has now gone back on?
What a complete f*cking liar he is. He conned so many of the yoof to vote for him. Typical Labour lies.
You silly boy believing what you read in the Daily Mail
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,323
I rarely feel sorry for Lib Dems but having read a number of accounts they were f***** from the minute they joined the coalition. Reality was they would have been forced to go along with something to get something else in at which point the Tories often took credit.
The machine was working against them from day one.
I have little time for any politicians and I struggle with the way voters support parties like football teams.
janee
Fur half
I have worked for 30 years and joined a small charity that ran things very badly and unfairly dismissed me after a year of terrible treatment. As a small homeless charity in Brighton, it had the highest rate of tribunals against it per employee in the local area.
This really helps - I've not been in work for over a year and my tribunal is soon.
I'm not a chancer, employers should treat their workers well if they do not want tribunals. This has ruined my career and parts of my life.
This really helps - I've not been in work for over a year and my tribunal is soon.
I'm not a chancer, employers should treat their workers well if they do not want tribunals. This has ruined my career and parts of my life.
Had a democratic election, is this something else that Jeremy would scrap?
In practice most of the "frivolous" cases always tended to get weeded out or discouraged before they got to a full tribunal hearing - many many cases got dropped early in the process once the claimants had it pointed out to them (by a lawyer, union, CAB or whatever) that their case is weak. As far as I know there was never any hard evidence of the tribunals being clogged up with frivolous claims, as the Tory government and some employer bodies claimed. In any case, from a perspective of justice it's better, in my view, to err on the side of a few so-called frivolous cases getting through, than the alternative which has been many people with genuine claims not being able to afford to access justice and take their employer or ex-employer to tribunal to get that justice.
From that perspective, today's Supreme Court decision is a real landmark decision asserting the rights of the weak against the powerful - the balance of power in the employment relationship is always stacked against the worker; fair access to tribunals is one small redress to that imbalance.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk