What can be claimed 




The compensatory award can include:


• expenses resulting from the dismissal;




• lost wages from the dismissal date up to the hearing: wages are awarded net of the tax and National Insurance that would have been paid if the claimant had been working;




• loss of statutory protection: this part of the award is supposed to reflect the notional loss of job security that comes from having enough service to claim unfair dismissal. It should be around £500-£600 to reflect the need for two years’ service; 




• costs directly associated with seeking new work, such as travel costs to interviews: all evidence should be kept, including receipts; 




• future net lost wages: the period of lost wages awarded should reflect how long the claimant is likely to take to find alternative work, considering individual characteristics such as age and any disability, and general features such as poor economic conditions. If a claimant has not found alternative work quickly, the largest part of the compensation claim is likely to be for actual and projected net lost earnings; 




• loss of pension rights: particularly if the employee was in a final salary scheme, this sum can be substantial. In Griffin v Plymouth Hospital NHS Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1240, the Court of Appeal confirmed that where there is good evidence that an employee would have stayed in their job for their entire working life, compensation should aim to reflect the amount of pension the employee would have received on retirement, not the value of lost pension contributions. In August 2017, the ET President issued new guidance explaining how tribunals assess pension loss, available online.


A tribunal can award compensation for loss of the opportunity to work a job share (Stroud Rugby Football Club v Monkman [2013] UKEAT/0143/13/SM/2110). 




An employer’s ability to pay is irrelevant to the size of the award (Tao Herbs and Acupuncture Limited v Jin [2010] UKEAT 1477/09/1407).
Employers cannot escape the obligation to pay proper compensation by arguing that the size of the award would endanger their business.