This is the question that more and more labor law practitioners are asking themselves, as this stage of the industrial tribunal trial can seem like a waste of time.
We often hear:
👉 it is useless to maintain this phase, the parties being able to agree at any time outside of this hearing;
👉 this first step only lengthens an already very long industrial tribunal procedure due to a lack of financial means (some councils have hearing delays of several years…);
👉 it's a waste of time, the parties knowing in advance that they do not wish to reconcile in the vast majority of cases.
However, it is also a time for exchanges which can prove useful between the parties to the trial, the counsel taking advantage of this opportunity to take stock of the case and sometimes find an amicable solution.
The powers granted to the conciliation board, too often forgotten, also have a certain interest in obtaining, if necessary, documents that are sometimes essential for the rest of the procedure.
As often in social law, the answer is therefore not obvious!
Because if the conciliation is abolished, it will still be necessary to ensure that the procedural timetable is brought into line in one way or another.
留言