My employer offers employees a payment if someone applies to work for the company on their recommendation, and the person they referred to the company stays with the company for a qualifying period.

A colleague referred two people, and with each of those referrals she was told that the person applying hadn't put her details on their application form, which is a requirement to claim the reward. She knows as a fact that that's incorrect, because she witnessed the second referred person putting her details on their application form.

I recently referred a friend, who accepted a position with my company. I've made multiple enquiries to confirm that I will be getting my payment if he stays with the company for the qualifying period. However, none of my emails have been replied to, and it feels like I'm being stonewalled (especially in light of my colleague's experience).

Assuming that my friend remains with the company for the qualifying period and that the company doesn't give me the promised payment, what options do I have to recover the money?

the new employees need to ask for copies of the relevant forms so they can see what is written on to them. They are entitled to this under the GDPR/DPA This can then be relayed to the introducer who cna then take the matter up again with some authority.

Problem is that this may lead to either the scheme being scrapped ( no bad thing as it may be subtly discriminatory anyways) or the management may see the pair of you as wanting to cause ripples and then use any excuse to put you in your place for daring to question their authority and integrity.

as for recovering the money, well you can sue for breach of contract if they absolutely stonewall but that wont win you friends. As said, I think that killing the scheme is better as it really doesnt offer equal opportunities.

I would just add - is the scheme actually contractual? There is a difference between offering a discretionary incentive and a contractual condition. So you can only sue for payment of its contractual anyway. Although, for the reasons already outlined, that may not be the wisest course.