A five-year delay is effectively economic servitude for that person.
In England and Wales, a justice system designed to protect workers from wrongful dismissal has buckled under its own weight, leaving nearly 72,000 people suspended in legal limbo for up to five years. The backlog is not merely administrative failure — it is a slow erosion of the social contract between employer and employee, where the promise of accountability dissolves into years of economic hardship and unresolved grief. Technology meant to widen access to justice has, in an ironic turn, deepened the crisis, as AI-generated submissions overwhelm already strained judges. The question now is whether incremental reform can hold a collapsing system together, or whether something more fundamental must be reimagined.
- Nearly 72,000 employment claims sit unheard — a figure that grew by 26,000 in a single year — and dismissed workers now face waits of five years or more before a judge will see their case.
- One widow, whose husband died weeks after leaving a job he believed was harming him, must sell the family home to fund a tribunal case that will not be heard until 2029, unable to settle his estate or close the chapter of her grief.
- Self-represented claimants turning to AI for help are inadvertently making things worse — generating 30 to 40-page submissions that bury judges in material, replacing the one-page claim with something closer to a legal brief.
- Employers are not spared: witnesses retire, relocate, or die during the long wait, and some cases have been struck out entirely because a fair trial was deemed no longer possible.
- The Employment Lawyers' Association is calling for a new dispute resolution body, AI-assisted claim evaluation, and a tiered case-track system — while the government promises more judges and digital tools that experts say fall short of what is needed.
The Employment Tribunal in England and Wales is drowning in its own caseload. Nearly 72,000 claims sit in backlog — up 26,000 in a single year — and those filing unfair dismissal cases now face waits of five years or more. For people who have lost their jobs, this is not a delay. It is economic catastrophe stretched across half a decade.
Catriona Ball's story captures the human cost with particular force. Her husband Lewis died in November 2024 at 43, weeks after leaving a job he believed was destroying his health. After his death, Catriona filed a claim for constructive unfair dismissal and failure to make reasonable adjustments. The case will not reach a full hearing until 2029. To fund it, she will have to sell the family home. She cannot settle her husband's estate until the case concludes. She is grieving, raising two children, and waiting. "Grief is brutal," she says. "Every day is affected and you have to get through each day."
Her situation is exceptional only in its tragedy. The legal limbo itself is now routine. Caspar Glynn of the Employment Lawyers' Association describes tens of thousands of lives on hold — workers without income, businesses unable to move on, witnesses who retire or die before cases are heard. A five-year wait, he says, is "effectively economic servitude."
The causes are layered. Complex discrimination and whistleblowing claims require longer hearings. But there is also a perverse contribution from artificial intelligence. Many claimants, unable to afford lawyers, turn to AI to draft their submissions. The result is documents of 30 to 40 pages — exhaustive, sometimes legally invented — where a one or two-page claim once sufficed. Judges must now work through small legal briefs. The tool meant to democratize access to justice has lengthened the queue.
The Employment Lawyers' Association is calling for a new dispute resolution body to intercept cases before they reach court, AI tools to evaluate and streamline claims, and a tiered track system that routes simpler cases to legal officers rather than judges. The government has promised more hearing days, more judges, and digital investment. Experts say it is not enough.
Catriona could withdraw her claim and end the ordeal. But she feels the weight of doing it for Lewis. "He would want some accountability," she says. And so she waits — alongside thousands of others — in a system that has no clear timeline for justice.
The Employment Tribunal in England and Wales is drowning. Nearly 72,000 claims sit in backlog—up 26,000 in a single year—and people filing unfair dismissal cases now face waits of five years or more before a judge will hear their case. For those who have lost their jobs, the delay is not an inconvenience. It is economic catastrophe stretched across half a decade.
Catriona Ball knows this intimately. In November 2024, her husband Lewis collapsed during a rugby match at his childhood club near Kettering. He was 43. The defibrillator he had helped secure was used to try to save him. Nothing worked. He died of coronary artery disease and hypertension. Weeks before his death, Lewis had quit his job, convinced that workplace stress was destroying his health and that his employer was not taking his disability seriously. After he died, Catriona filed a claim for constructive unfair dismissal and failure to make reasonable adjustments. She filed in February 2025. The case will not go before a judge for a full hearing until 2029. Four years of waiting. Four years of grief compounded by legal limbo.
To fund the tribunal case, Catriona will have to sell the family home. There is virtually no legal aid for employment tribunals. She cannot settle her husband's estate until the case concludes. Every day she manages the logistics of loss while trapped in a system that moves at a glacial pace. "Grief is brutal," she says. "Every day is affected and you have to get through each day. You've got kids who need you." The tribunal backlog has turned her bereavement into a financial and emotional siege.
Catriona's situation is exceptional only in its tragedy. The legal limbo itself is now routine. Caspar Glynn, chair of the Employment Lawyers' Association, describes the scale plainly: tens of thousands of lives on hold, and businesses unable to put cases behind them either. Workers who have been dismissed have no income. A five-year delay, he says, is "effectively economic servitude." Employers face their own problem—key witnesses move on, retire, or die. Some cases have been struck out entirely because judges concluded a fair trial was no longer possible. The system is not coping, and experts warn it will only worsen.
The reasons are layered. There has been a rise in complex discrimination and whistleblowing claims that require lengthy hearings. But there is also a perverse twist involving the very technology that was supposed to help: artificial intelligence. Many claimants cannot afford lawyers and represent themselves. Unsure of their rights, they turn to AI for help drafting their claims. The AI obliges by generating voluminous documents—30 to 40 pages—that list every possible claim and fact that might favor the claimant, sometimes inventing rights that do not exist. What used to be a one or two-page submission is now a small legal brief. Judges must spend vastly more time reading, analyzing, and ruling on these expanded claims. The tool meant to democratize access to justice has inadvertently lengthened the queue.
The Employment Lawyers' Association is calling for radical reform. They want a new dispute resolution body to handle workplace disputes before they reach court. They want the tribunal service to use AI to evaluate and streamline claims rather than expand them. They want cases sorted into different tracks based on complexity and value, with simple claims handled by court legal officers instead of judges. The government has acknowledged the pressure and promised to maximize hearing days, recruit more judges, expand virtual hearings, and invest in digital systems. But experts say these measures, while necessary, are not enough.
Catriona remains caught in the machinery. She could withdraw her claim and end the ordeal. But she feels the weight of doing it for Lewis—for his memory, for some measure of accountability. "He certainly wouldn't want me suffering the way I am because of this process," she says, "but equally he would want some accountability." She is grieving, managing two children, and waiting for a system that has no clear timeline for justice. The backlog grows. The wait stretches longer. And thousands of others wait alongside her.
Citações Notáveis
The system isn't coping at the moment, and it's only going to get worse in the future. A delay of five years is effectively economic servitude for that person.— Caspar Glynn KC, chair of the Employment Lawyers' Association
He certainly wouldn't want me suffering the way I am because of this process, but equally he would want some accountability.— Catriona Ball, widow of Lewis Ball
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why does it take five years now when it didn't before?
The backlog has exploded—26,000 new claims in a single year. But it's not just volume. Complex discrimination and whistleblowing cases take much longer to hear. And then there's the AI problem: self-represented claimants without lawyers are using AI to draft their submissions, which generates 30 to 40-page documents instead of the old one or two pages. Judges have to read and rule on all of it.
So AI is making things slower, not faster?
Paradoxically, yes. The AI is trying to be thorough—it lists every possible claim and fact. But that thoroughness creates mountains of paper that judges have to process. It's meant to help people who can't afford lawyers, but it's clogging the system.
What happens to someone like Catriona while she waits?
She's in legal limbo. She can't settle her husband's estate. She has to sell her home to pay for the case. She's grieving and managing two children alone. A five-year wait isn't just a delay—it's economic and emotional devastation.
Can employers defend themselves effectively in this backlog?
Not really. Key witnesses leave the company or die. Evidence gets stale. Some cases have been struck out because judges said a fair trial was no longer possible. The delay itself becomes a kind of injustice.
What would actually fix this?
Experts want a new dispute resolution system to handle cases before they reach tribunal. They want AI to streamline claims, not expand them. They want simple cases handled by court officers, not judges. And they want cases sorted by complexity. The government says it's hiring more judges and improving digital systems, but lawyers say that's not radical enough.
Why does Catriona keep fighting if she could just withdraw?
She feels she owes it to Lewis. He believed he was being treated unfairly. She wants some accountability for what happened to him, even though the process is destroying her.