Employment tribunal (ET) time limits

[storm123]

Hi guys,

 

I am really confused as to the time limits when submitting ET claims.

 

I have had 3-4 incidents of racial & religious discrimination at the hands of my manager.

I submitted a grievance and a subsequent appeal to which i am still waiting for a response.

 

My understanding is that the claim needs to be submitted to a ET within six months of the incident. Am I correct in thinking this?

 

Do I have to wait the response of my grievance appeal hearing before submitting my claim?

 

I only have a month left since six months of the first incident.

 

I do still work for the company if it makes a difference.

 

The first incident took place at the end of March 2008. I submitted a collective grievance at the end of April 2008.

 

Sorry if none of the above makes sense.

I look forward to your replies.

[elche]

Normally ET1 must be prresented within 3 months of last act complained of.

 

This can be extended by 3 months in 2 cases:

 

a) At time of presenting within the original time limit a claim to the ET you have not yet used SGP (stat grievance procedure) or have raised grievance only within last 28 days

 

b) You sent grievance within original time limt and at time of expiration of this time limit the SGP has not been completed.

 

DO NOT run out of time as ET's very rarely accept such claims, subject to the just and equitable rule.

[mortlake]

b) You sent grievance within original time limt and at time of expiration of this time limit the SGP has not been completed.

 

In my discrimination case there was a let-out for a series of acts of discrimination counting as one long single one, so if the chair agrees you can sue for the beginning within three months of the end.

 

ACAS phone help line might know of any other let-outs, or Co-Op legal helpline if you join free.

 

From my experience and the next one to sue Foundation66, "just and equitable" means anything but: the next person told the chair he had had to learn the law while working as a builder and moving between several different bedsits and chasing mail. The chair said "those are very good reasons but not the reasons in case law".