'Silence is golden' on employment law, professor tells Cable

The government is creating anxiety among businesses about the extent of their regulatory burden just by talking about employment law, Hugh Collins, professor of English law at the LSE, has said.

"My advice to Vince Cable is that silence is golden, though I'm not sure that any politician will follow that advice," Professor Collins said.

Addressing the Wesminster employment forum in London this morning, Professor Collins said only 12 per cent of employment tribunal claims were ultimately successful.

He said that even though the UK had a "relatively light touch" approach to regulation, employers often perceived a high level of burden.

Professor Collins said many employers believed there was a "statutory dismissal process or procedure", when all the law said is that they should act reasonably in all the circumstances.

He said it was "very unlikely" that the government's extension last April of the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims had a positive impact on employment levels.

"Perhaps a few more people will be employed, but a few more will be fired," he said.

Professor Collins said there were "tensions" in some of the government's goals, such as encouraging earlier conciliation by ACAS.

"This clearly involves more government intervention in the workplace and requires two sets of regulations, but will it work? That depends very heavily on funding for ACAS."

He attacked the idea that UK employment law had 'gold-plated' EU law on agency workers and said the government had admitted that this was not the case.

However, he praised three features of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill, being debated by the Commons this afternoon.

These were the dropping of a qualifying period for claims of political discrimination, the replacement of the requirement for whistle-blowers to act "in good faith" with "in the public interest", and fines for employers who acted particularly badly when dismissing staff.

In a panel discussion after the professor's speech, Philip Sack, senior adviser in employment policy at the Institute of Directors, said employment law had become "incredibly complex and detailed" over the last 40 years.

"Many employers are forced to settle out of court even if they think the claim has no merit or is ridiculous," he said.

Sack said many of the employment law reforms should have gone further, and there should be a "comprehensive review of gold-plating of EU regulations" and of trade union law.

John Usher, legal consultant to Unite the Union, described the government's reforms as "the greatest attack on individuals' rights to claim Britain has ever seen".

Usher said many of the reforms were simply designed to encourage employers to think they could sack people more easily.