2014King s Law JournalRequires access

Judicial Reform of Unfair Dismissal Law: Recent Developments in the Range of Reasonable Responses

Tor Brodtkorb

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

UK unfair dismissal law has been widely criticised for being unduly favourable to the interests of the employer, and correspondingly unhelpful to dismissed employees. Since it was first articulated in 1981, the range of reasonable responses test has obscured the statutory language establishing the right of employees not to be unfairly dismissed, and it has imposed an unwarranted barrier to employee success in claims of unfair dismissal for misconduct. The range test decrees that an employment tribunal (ET) may find a conduct dismissal unfair only if no reasonable employer would have dismissed in those circumstances, establishing the broadest possible conception of the term 'reasonable', which is the term the Employment Rights Act 1996 sets as the test for the fairness of an employer's decision to dismiss. More seriously, the test prohibits ETs from 'substituting' their own views for those of employers with respect to whether dismissal can be considered a reasonable response in the circumstances. Because of this privileging of employers' views, finding a dismissal to be unfair has exposed ETs to a disproportionate risk of reversal by higher courts, skewing the unfair dismissal system in favour of the employer by making a finding of fair dismissal the safer course for ETs. As a result, the protection provided to employees by the right not to be unfairly dismissed has been weakened.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

UK unfair dismissal law has been widely criticised for being unduly favourable to the interests of the employer, and correspondingly unhelpful to dismissed employees. Since it was first articulated in 1981, the range of reasonable responses test has obscured the statutory language establishing the right of employees not to be unfairly dismissed, and it has imposed an unwarranted barrier to employee success in claims of unfair dismissal for misconduct. The range test decrees that an employment tribunal (ET) may find a conduct dismissal unfair only if no reasonable employer would have dismissed in those circumstances, establishing the broadest possible conception of the term 'reasonable', which is the term the Employment Rights Act 1996 sets as the test for the fairness of an employer's decision to dismiss. More seriously, the test prohibits ETs from 'substituting' their own views for those of employers with respect to whether dismissal can be considered a reasonable response in the circumstances. Because of this privileging of employers' views, finding a dismissal to be unfair has exposed ETs to a disproportionate risk of reversal by higher courts, skewing the unfair dismissal system in favour of the employer by making a finding of fair dismissal the safer course for ETs. As a result, the protection provided to employees by the right not to be unfairly dismissed has been weakened.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

UK unfair dismissal law has been widely criticised for being unduly favourable to the interests of the employer, and correspondingly unhelpful to dismissed employees. Since it was first articulated in 1981, the range of reasonable responses test has obscured the statutory language establishing the right of employees not to be unfairly dismissed, and it has imposed an unwarranted barrier to employee success in claims of unfair dismissal for misconduct. The range test decrees that an employment tribunal (ET) may find a conduct dismissal unfair only if no reasonable employer would have dismissed in those circumstances, establishing the broadest possible conception of the term 'reasonable', which is the term the Employment Rights Act 1996 sets as the test for the fairness of an employer's decision to dismiss. More seriously, the test prohibits ETs from 'substituting' their own views for those of employers with respect to whether dismissal can be considered a reasonable response in the circumstances. Because of this privileging of employers' views, finding a dismissal to be unfair has exposed ETs to a disproportionate risk of reversal by higher courts, skewing the unfair dismissal system in favour of the employer by making a finding of fair dismissal the safer course for ETs. As a result, the protection provided to employees by the right not to be unfairly dismissed has been weakened.

Key concepts: Dismissal, Unfair dismissal, Misconduct, Tribunal, Statutory law, Test (biology), Law, Political science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Judicial Reform of Unfair Dismissal Law: Recent Developments in the Range of Reasonable Responses — Research Paper | ScholarLens