ABSTRACT
Despite some expressions of disappointment that the scheme has, at least on paper, turned out to be more complex than might have been anticipated from both the original proposals of Lewis and Clark and some of the draft outlines included in subsequent consultation exercises, many commentators from across the employment relations spectrum have welcomed its introduction. A common reaction has been one of ‘horses for courses’, with one or more of the scheme’s features being cited as making it preferable to an employment tribunal hearing in the particular set of circumstances of a specific case. In one instance, this might be the more informal nature of the proceedings, in another, the confidential nature of the hearing and the award and, in a third, the convenience to the parties of a speedy local hearing. Thus, many experienced representatives have intimated that whilst they would not-at least in the early stages, before some detailed research on the scheme’s usage has been published-consider recommending it to their clients as a matter of course, they would do so where the circumstances of a specific case made the arbitration route an attractive one.
