AN ideal world would have no need of an Employment Tribunal (ET) service - but reality isn't like that, writes Ken Mann.

In common with thousands of other people across the UK, Tom Johnstone reluctantly but determinedly sought the final and unbiased judgement of the service after he was dismissed from his management consultant post following an accusation of gross misconduct by his employer.

He is now training director and co-owner of a successful management development business working from a base in Strathaven, Lanarkshire, and in February was awarded more than £41,000 after an ET panel hearing in Glasgow unanimously upheld his claim of unfair dismissal against that employer.

Coincidentally, the award was made the very day I was preparing a piece for this column on the sometimes tortuous and potentially expensive process involved when a tribunal is the only option left. Upon seeing it in print, he decided to share his experience of the system. Cost, as I indicated in the original article, is the first hurdle - £1,200 in hearing/lodging fees alone, since legislation was controversially altered in 2013 in a bid to drastically cut service expense.

In the fiscal year 2013/14, 86 per cent fewer claims were initiated. That reflects both the fees regime and a new ruling made at the same time, increasing the employment qualification period from one to two years. Johnstone says his former employer's allegation arose over a derogatory throwaway remark he made about his boss to a colleague, immediately after a brusque conversation with the director. This remark was overheard by his boss.

While this was a trigger, Johnstone's position at tribunal was that he was provoked through his boss's harassing treatment of him over a lengthy period of time. It became a far from straightforward case but the claimant now feels completely vindicated. The tribunal heard that the firm involved has since ceased active trading. The respondent (employer) failed to appear at the hearing, nor was legal representation arranged by the firm. Only after the hearing did the ET panel hear from the employer representative that there was no intention to defend the case at the hearing.

Therefore, no fair reason for dismissal was evident and the tribunal 'accepted Mr Johnstone as a credible and reliable witness'. Speaking of his latter day working relationship with his line manager, and will to win back lost income, the claimant insists: "It got to the stage where I was almost frightened to move because whatever I did was wrong. Simplistically, I thought - here was an example of a bully, I have to do something about this."

When considering funding options for what was to become an 18-month journey to justice, he became aware that his home insurers covered him for a variety of legal expenses, including employment matters. Up to a threshold, this has paid his lawyer's fees and related expenses, but the rest - still a four figure sum - will come from retirement savings. Johnstone's lawyer - Alison Forsyth, an employment specialist at Kerr Stirling Solicitors in Stirling - says the costs associated with tribunals particularly affect would-be claimants on lower incomes.

"At the same time as these fees being introduced, we also had the option available of Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) early conciliation. Before someone walks away from a claim, I would always encourage them to go for early conciliation. That's free, there's no lodging fee and that can produce a settlement before a claim is lodged," she explains. "But if that doesn't work, then part of my job is to look at the commerciality. The difficulty for employees is that they've only got three months to lodge a claim from when they are dismissed.

"At that time they have to spend £250 in lodging fees then when the hearing comes around there is another £950 fee and they (the client) will look at you and say 'well, what can I get back from the tribunal?'. "There is no guarantee of winning a tribunal. When you lodge, you're actually not sure what your loss (the amount resulting from time away from work with the employer) will be. At tribunal, if you're successful, you get two main awards.

The first is the basic award and that's a redundancy payment. The second award, which is usually by far the biggest, is the compensatory award. But as it says on the tin, it's compensatory - if you haven't lost it, you don't get it. So if you're out of work for a month and get another job, your compensation is one month's salary. "Tom Johnstone had a considerable loss but he wouldn't have known that at the start of the process. His case was lengthy because of the nature of what was happening with the respondent. But it's not unusual for the case to take nine months to 12 months to conclude so it's very difficult to predict what the loss is going to be.

"It disproportionately affects people on lower incomes, because that £250 lodging fee doesn't vary with the value of your claim. The smaller your loss - directly related to your earnings - the greater the disadvantage."

Tom Johnstone must now pursue settlement of an award made against a company that has apparently ceased normal trading. He could still be in for an unpredictable wait before the scales of justice are truly balanced.