From clients who prefer to ‘share’ documents with us on screen to the challenge of trying to work out which bits of the latest ‘guidance’ are actually law, it sometimes seems that we spend more time trying to work out how to do our jobs than actually advising clients.

I love the pace of change inherent in employment law and the interaction with politics, news and human life – and nothing we learn ever seems to be wasted. But it is hard these days for any of us to be confident that we are on top of our game. We are forced to adapt repeatedly, working on our ability to distil practical advice from ‘the grey’, crafting careful caveats (and blunt warnings) to manage risks we don’t fully understand, and trying to magic more time so that we can be there for the clients who need us most. We can, at least, be hugely grateful for the volume of excellent and speedy commentary shared by colleagues – particularly by barristers who have gone above and beyond in supporting solicitors throughout this challenging period.

But maybe it’s time to take stock and think about whether all this new stuff is necessary and helpful – and also whether perhaps there might be some things we could do better.

Tribunals are naturally a key concern for employment lawyers and, currently, waiting times are a worry. Waiting lists are not, however, entirely a product of ‘the system’ or funding. They are also linked to the work employment lawyers do (or for whatever reason haven’t managed to do).

Now seems a good time to look carefully at our approaches to dispute avoidance and resolution. We have always played a part in educating working people on the law and working practices, but perhaps we could do more. And, naturally, we all think we’re pretty good at settling claims. However, a quick reflection on one’s personal experience of working with ‘the other side’ must tell us that some lawyers (and clients) are better at it than others. This can’t just be a question of personal brilliance – strategies to avoid and resolve claims can be learned (or, at least, I think so).

Most of us seem to get better at it with practice (especially after making mistakes) and with suggestions, examples and complaints from others. Perhaps there is more we could do to share the things we learn along the way with other employment lawyers, and to give working people better tools to prevent disputes from arising in the first place?

There might also be other more formal approaches that could be adopted. We already have ‘ordinary’ mediation, Acas conciliation and judicial mediation. And it seems unlikely that employment lawyers will come up with suggestions as radical as the current proposal to suspend jury trials, but there might be other options that could, temporarily or permanently, serve employees and employers better than (or in addition to) the status quo?

While we hope that challenges associated with the pandemic will pass soon, improved dispute avoidance and resolution could serve us well for years to come.

Juliet Carp, Keystone Law and ELA Chair