An employment lawyer who represents leading footballers has claimed controversial tribunal fees should be ditched in an independent Scotland.
Margaret Gribbon, who acts for the Professional Footballers' Association (PFA) Scotland, warned that any future independent government would be well advised to stop the charges as soon as possible.
It follows a dramatic 68 per cent drop in the number of cases since the fees were introduced.
Ms Gribbon, of Bridge Litigation Solicitors, said: "The introduction of Employment Tribunal fees has had the impact that many feared it would have; fees are preventing individuals, particularly the most vulnerable, from accessing justice in the employment tribunals after being unfairly dismissed, discriminated against or underpaid by an employer.
"The staggering reduction in the number of claims lodged since the introduction of fees demonstrates, beyond doubt, that only those who can afford it are able to seek redress following unlawful treatment at work. Fees are unfair and unjust and their retention, in any form, is extremely difficult to justify.
"It is a very unpopular decision and - should there be a Yes vote in September - any future independent Scottish Government would be wise to ditch the fees as soon as possible."
Figures obtained under freedom of information laws show there have been almost 5000 fewer cases in the nine months after the fees were introduced on July 29, compared with the same nine months the previous year.
Scotland has experienced an above-average drop - statistics showed that UK-wide claims had fallen by 59 per cent for the three months from January to March this year.
The Scottish Government opposed the fees and during a recent discussion in Parliament on the issue, Roseanna Cunningham, minister for Community Safety and Legal Affairs, said that "principled opposition" would continue if a Yes vote is achieved.
But the Conservatives said the figures should be welcomed. Tory chief whip John Lamont said: "You'd think a drop in employment tribunals would be something to welcome, not gnash teeth over."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article