Employment Tribunals Under Strain

April 23, 2026

The 55th meeting of the Employment Tribunals (England & Wales) National User Group (NUG), held on 12 March 2026, provided a clear snapshot of a system under mounting pressure. As of March 2026, the Tribunal system is facing escalating waiting times, rising claim volumes, increasing case complexity and persistent challenges in judicial recruitment.

What This Means for Employers

Organisations should expect a continued increase in employment-related claims as new Employment Rights Act 2025 provisions are implemented and employee awareness of statutory rights increases, particularly in relation to disability discrimination.

The widespread publication of employment rights through traditional and digital media has significantly improved workforce understanding of entitlements and routes to challenge, making claims more likely to be pursued at an earlier stage.

At the same time, the increasing use of AI tools is significantly improving employee awareness of employment-related rights and potential claims. These tools are commonly used to generate accessible advice notes and tailored legal guidance, as well as drafting documentation relevant to an employment issue in dispute.

Tribunal Waiting Times

Tribunal waiting times now represent one of the most serious operational challenges facing the system. Delays are no longer incremental, with cases routinely being listed years ahead rather than months.

Across most regions, straightforward hearings are commonly being listed into the second half of 2026. Two‑day hearings are frequently scheduled for 2027, while in London South such hearings are being listed into early 2028. The outlook is more severe for complex litigation. In some London and southeast regions, five‑day hearings are now being listed into 2028 or 2029. While Wales and northern England continue to experience comparatively shorter delays, waiting times remain extended nationwide.

These delays are driven by a combination of sustained judicial shortages and a significant increase in complex cases. Although video hearings continue to provide some flexibility, the President of the Employment Tribunals was clear that waiting times are unlikely to improve in the short term and may deteriorate further before stabilising.

Increased Volume of Claims

Claim volumes are now at their highest levels since the disruption caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, with no sign of slowing. Unlike the post‑pandemic surge, which largely consisted of straightforward claims, the current increase is broader, more persistent and more complex. This trend is likely influenced by the rapid growth of AI tools and increased media exposure of mental health conditions, which have heightened awareness of mental disabilities and individuals’ ability to identify and articulate potential discrimination.

In Q3 2025–2026, single claim receipts reached approximately 13,000, with outstanding claims nearing 60,000. Complex cases now account for 61% of single claim receipts across England and Wales and almost 70% in London, compared with just 20–25% fifteen to twenty years ago.

Disability discrimination claims are a particularly significant driver, representing almost half of all discrimination claims. While this reflects increased awareness of mental health, neurodiversity and reasonable adjustments, disability discrimination claims are often highly fact‑sensitive and resource‑intensive, creating additional strain on Tribunal capacity.

ACAS has also reported unprecedented levels of demand. More than 135,000 early conciliation notifications have already been received this year, with numbers expected to exceed 150,000. Demand shows no signs of levelling off, with over 3,600 cases received in a single week in February alone.

Full implementation of the Employment Rights Act 2025 is expected to increase demand by a further 15–20%. Although ACAS will have extended timeframes for conciliation under the Employment Rights Act 2025, it has highlighted that growth is being driven primarily by complex claims. The largest jurisdictions remain unfair dismissal (37,000 notifications), wages (28,000) and disability discrimination (24,000).

Sustained recruitment difficulties

The President of the Employment Tribunals confirmed that an exercise was carried out in 2025 to appoint 36 full‑time employment judges across England and Wales. This exercise failed to meet its target, with only 25.5 full‑time judges appointed, leaving a shortfall of 10.5 posts.

The President of the Employment Tribunals explained that this shortfall was largely driven by recruitment difficulties in London. Candidates have been increasingly reluctant to take up London‑based roles, citing cost‑of‑living pressures and a reduced appetite for relocation. While some mitigation has been achieved through split deployment between London and regional locations, the underlying imbalance remains unresolved.

A further recruitment exercise was launched on 12 March 2026, closing on 9 April 2026, seeking to appoint 55 full‑time employment judges. The President of the Employment Tribunals stressed that additional judicial capacity is essential to support the full implementation of the Employment Rights Act 2025. However, similar challenges are expected to persist, particularly in London.

Practical Steps for Employers

Employers should continue to take proactive steps to manage increasing employment risk and minimise claim exposure, including:

  • Ensuring policies and procedures are up to date and robust;
  • Training line managers on statutory rights, fair process and emerging risks;
  • Factoring Tribunal delays into strategy and planning; and
  • Prioritising early engagement, which reduces the risk of prolonged Tribunal proceedings.
How We Can Help

For further information or to discuss the issues raised in this article, please contact a member of our Employment Team.

Darren Smith
Partner, Employment
<script>
document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', function () {
  const deptEl = document.getElementById('acf-author-department');
  const department = deptEl?.dataset?.department;

  if (typeof gtag === 'function' && department) {
    gtag('set', { author_department: department });
  }
});


  window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || [];
  const dept = document.getElementById("author-department")?.textContent?.trim();
  if (dept) {
    window.dataLayer.push({
      event: "authorDataReady",
      author_department: dept
    });
  }

</script>
View profileContact Us

This reflects the law and market position at the date of publication and is written as a general guide. It does not contain definitive legal advice, which should be sought in relation to a specific matter.

Latest Legal Insights