• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
Call us now: 01243 836 840   [email protected]
Pure Employment Law
  • Who We Are
    • Nicola Brown
    • Peter Stevens
    • David Jones
    • Debbie Poole
    • Linda Nye
    • Brenda Cherry
  • For Employers
    • Advice on HR and People issues
    • Investigations, Hearings and Appeals
    • Restructuring and Redundancy
    • Defending Employment Tribunal Claims
    • Dismissal of Senior Executives
    • Contracts, Handbooks and Policies
    • Employment Law Training
  • For Employees
    • Settlement Agreements
    • Workplace Issues including Disciplinary and Grievance
    • Bringing an Employment Tribunal Claim
  • Employment Law Events
  • Legal Updates
  • Testimonials
  • Vacancies
  • Contact us
  • Search
  • Menu Menu

Settlement Agreement discussions – potential pitfalls

30th September 2014

Alex Bishop

The notion of negotiating a quick exit for difficult employees has always been an attractive proposition for employers, particularly over the last year since the introduction of Settlement Agreements in July 2013, replacing Compromise Agreements.

The change in name also brought with it new provisions whereby settlement offers and discussions relating to the termination of an employee’s contract cannot normally be referred to in evidence in a future unfair dismissal claim. However, whilst these provisions were designed to protect employers, there can be some hidden dangers. This article will discuss the benefits and the potential pitfalls of entering into Settlement Agreement discussions with an employee. You may also find our FAQs on Settlement Agreements useful which can be found here.

The Benefits

The new provisions are of most use where employers are on the brink of dealing with a performance or disciplinary issue and where the employee is likely to be aware that there will be serious consequences and possibly dismissal. Employers are able to have a discussion with the employee at the outset and offer them an exit in the form of a Settlement Agreement. This saves the employee the stress and potential embarrassment of a disciplinary and potential dismissal. For the employer, the cost of ‘paying off’ the employee may be a small price to pay set off against the potential headache and cost (in time and money) of carrying out a full disciplinary/capability procedure.

If the employee refuses to accept the Settlement Agreement offered, then the employer can then proceed with its usual disciplinary/capability procedures. If this were to result in the termination of the employee’s contract or the employee’s resignation, then the settlement conversations would not be admissible in evidence in any subsequent unfair dismissal claim. Also, the employee is not able to claim that just having the settlement conversation amounts to constructive dismissal (which was something that could have been raised previously).

The Pitfalls

– Improper behaviour by the employer during settlement negotiations

From our experience, employers who jump straight into pre-termination negotiations without first taking legal advice may risk engaging in ‘improper behaviour.’ Where there has been improper behaviour the employer may lose the protection that the Settlement Agreement discussions offer, i.e. a tribunal can permit the employee to raise the settlement discussions as evidence during an unfair dismissal claim.

One example of improper behaviour could be where an employer puts undue pressure on the employee to accept a settlement offer by threatening dismissal if the offer is rejected.  We have found that employers sometimes dive head first into settlement discussions with an employee without fully investigating the issues and therefore risk inflating the situation. This can have damaging consequences to the ongoing employer/employee relationship if the employee refuses to leave under the settlement agreement and the employer does not have a fair reason to dismiss after a disciplinary/capability route.

Another example is giving the employee inadequate time to consider the offer. ACAS recommend a period of 10 calendar days, but we often see employers wanting a quicker resolution than this. The 10 day period is not set in stone, but the position may depend on whether the employer can justify its reasons for a shorter timeframe.

We expect the definition of what constitutes ‘improper behaviour’ to be clarified in case law in future. As a result, we foresee disputes arising over this question – and you do not want to find yourself appearing in a test case, so it is always best to take advice!

– Exclusions

The main exception to the new inadmissibility rule is that it only applies in ordinary unfair dismissal proceedings. This means that settlement discussions that relate to issues to do with a potential automatically unfair dismissal (e.g. whistleblowing) are potentially admissible. Likewise, discussions about other types of case such as discrimination or breach of contract do not afford employers protection either. This means that Settlement discussions could be raised in evidence unless they are covered by the ‘without prejudice’ rule (discussed below).

– Conflict with the ‘without prejudice’ rule

Prior to the introduction of Settlement Agreements, employers were able to enter into ‘without prejudice’ correspondence with their employees where there was an existing dispute between the parties.  This rule has been retained and as a result there is a risk that these two methods of negotiation could conflict. ‘Without prejudice’ correspondence can only be admitted in Tribunal where there has been ‘unambiguous impropriety.’ This is a much stricter test than ‘improper behaviour.’  This has created uncertainty as to the best time and means to negotiate an exit with an employee: offer a settlement agreement at the outset under the new provisions, or wait until there is a dispute and rely on the ‘without prejudice’ rules?

If you are an employer and are considering offering a Settlement Agreement to an employee then we would strongly advise speaking to a member of our team first who can help you avoid the pitfalls stated above.

If you would like to talk through a situation you are dealing with, or if you need advice on any aspect of employment law, you can contact any member of the Pure Employment Law team (01243 836840 or [email protected]).

Please note that this update is not intended to be exhaustive or be a substitute for legal advice. The application of the law in this area will often depend upon the specific facts and you are advised to seek specific advice on any given scenario.
Share this article
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://www.pureemploymentlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Pure-Employment-Law-logo.jpg 0 0 Nicola Brown https://www.pureemploymentlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Pure-Employment-Law-logo.jpg Nicola Brown2014-09-30 14:01:382015-06-02 01:41:48Settlement Agreement discussions – potential pitfalls

Join our mailing list

* = required field
Mailing Lists


Recent Legal Updates

  • Can long Covid be a disability? 29th June 2022
  • Employer unfairly counted disability-related absences when dismissing 29th June 2022
  • Did an Employment Tribunal correctly award an uplift for failure to follow the ACAS Code in a sham redundancy case? 29th June 2022
  • Without prejudice negotiations – what is unambiguous impropriety? 29th June 2022
  • Does referring to a man’s baldness at work amount to sexual harassment? 25th May 2022
Link to: Contact Us

Any questions? Why not get in touch!

Our advice is always given in plain English without any waffle, and we focus on providing practical solutions to our clients’ problems.

Contact us

LEGAL INFORMATION

Pure Employment Law | 1 Little London, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 1PH
[email protected] | Tel: 01243 836840

Pure Employment Law is the trading name of Pure Employment Law Limited, registered in England and Wales with company number 07134294 and whose registered office is 1 Little London, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 1PH. Pure Employment Law Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with registration number 533794. A list of the company’s directors is available for inspection at the registered office

DISCLAIMER

The information contained in this website is for general information purposes only. The information is provided by Pure Employment Law and while we endeavour to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

Privacy Policy | Cookies Policy | Terms & Conditions | How to make a complaint | Sitemap

© Pure Employment Law 2022

Scroll to top

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies as defined in our cookie policy.

Accept Cookie Policy

Cookie and Privacy Settings



How we use cookies

We may request cookies to be set on your device. We use cookies to let us know when you visit our websites, how you interact with us, to enrich your user experience, and to customize your relationship with our website.

Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.

Essential Website Cookies

These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.

Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, refusing them will have impact how our site functions. You always can block or delete cookies by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website. But this will always prompt you to accept/refuse cookies when revisiting our site.

We fully respect if you want to refuse cookies but to avoid asking you again and again kindly allow us to store a cookie for that. You are free to opt out any time or opt in for other cookies to get a better experience. If you refuse cookies we will remove all set cookies in our domain.

We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.

Google Analytics Cookies

These cookies collect information that is used either in aggregate form to help us understand how our website is being used or how effective our marketing campaigns are, or to help us customize our website and application for you in order to enhance your experience.

If you do not want that we track your visit to our site you can disable tracking in your browser here:

Other external services

We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.

Google Webfont Settings:

Google Map Settings:

Google reCaptcha Settings:

Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:

Other cookies

The following cookies are also needed - You can choose if you want to allow them:

Privacy Policy

You can read about our cookies and privacy settings in detail on our Privacy Policy Page.

Privacy Policy
Accept settingsHide notification only