Draft Employment and Discrimination Tribunal (Jersey) Amendment Regulations 202- (P.1/2026): comments
This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
STATES OF JERSEY
DRAFT EMPLOYMENT AND DISCRIMINATION TRIBUNAL (JERSEY) AMENDMENT REGULATIONS 202- (P.1/2026): COMMENTS
Presented to the States on 30th January 2026 by the Health and Social Security Scrutiny Panel
STATES GREFFE
2026 P.1 Com.
COMMENTS
Background
Following consultation with the Judicial Greffier and the Chair of the Jersey Employment and Discrimination Tribunal, the Minister for Social Security has identified and developed 3 specific areas to amend in respect of the 2014 Tribunal Regulations, as outlined in her report:
The Tribunal is functioning well, but minor adjustments are proposed to support some minor amendments. The amendments deal with the composition of the Tribunal in various types of hearing; clarify the appointments process for members of the Tribunal; and provide for an increased pool of lay members of the Tribunal'.
A brief overview of each of these can be found below. Appointment of Members of the Tribunal
Currently, the appointment of Jersey Employment and Discrimination Tribunal members is via the States Assembly. This part of the amendment, should it be adopted, would remove the requirement for Tribunal members to be appointed by the States Assembly and as such, enforces the independence of the Tribunal by removing any political involvement.
The amendment also clarifies the role of the Jersey Appoints Commission (JAC) as one that is limited to overseeing a fair recruitment process by which members are appointed. It removes any potential confusion or suggestion that the JAC has a role in approving candidates for appointment.
The Panel suggests that removing the political body from the appointment of an independent body is a positive step forward. It also agrees that the clarification of the role of the JEC in any appointment of Tribunal members will go some way in clearing up any confusion, should there be any.
The Pool of Lay Members of the Tribunal
Currently the pool of lay members is at least 2 but no more than 8'. This part of the amendment proposes to increase this to at least 4 but no more than 12'. The Minister has stated in the report that this is proposed to ensure that there are enough lay members available to hear claims in a timely manner, as it can be difficult to assemble members who can commit to sitting to decide claims which are more complex and lengthier. A larger pool is likely to provide a greater chance that hearings will be able to be listed more quickly for hearing and allows flexibility.
The Panel considers that increasing the number of lay members from 2 to 4 is positive and understands the commitment that needs to be made by lay Members to be part of the Tribunal and agree that the increase in Members will allow flexibility.
Page - 2
P.70/2025 Com.
Composition of Hearing Panels
The Tribunal is made up of members with experience of employee, employer and discrimination matters. This allows the Tribunal to hear claims in relation to both employment law and discrimination law breaches.
Current regulations state that those lay members recruited for discrimination experience may only sit on claims that are exclusively to do with breaches of the Discrimination Law. If adopted, this part of the amendment would allow the Chair of the Tribunal to allocate a discrimination lay member to a mixed' hearing – one that involves both employment and discrimination law breaches. The Minister states within the report that this would allow the discriminatory lay member a greater opportunity to sit and would allow flexibility.
It should be noted that claims that relate solely to Discrimination Law are relatively few with the majority of claims involving both employment and discrimination law breaches.
The Panel is content that allowing the Chair of the Tribunal to appoint a discrimination lay member to sit on claims other than those solely related to discrimination, will allow the Tribunal to use the expertise of its members to its full which the Panel believes can only help strengthen the Tribunal in undertaking its work.
Conclusion
Whilst unable to dedicate as much time to scrutinising the amendment regulations as it might have done had the original date of debate been maintained (24th February), the Panel nevertheless welcomes the proposed changes.
Comment under Standing Order 37A
These Comments were submitted after the noon deadline due to the proposed reduced lodging period for P.1/2026, in conjunction with ongoing priorities and workload.
Page - 3
P.1/2026 Com.