IJPLE 3 (1) 2019 Streetlaw – assisting access to justice in the Employment Tribunal A practice report Sarah Saunders Senior Lecturer, Cardiff School of Law and Politics Cardiff University, UK SaundersS@Cardiff.ac.uk Introduction If you have not yet read the judgment of Lord Reed in the Supreme Court decision of Unison v The Lord Chancellor[footnoteRef:1], please allow yourself a little time over the coming weeks to enjoy a clear and evidence-based statement on access to justice in the employment tribunals of England and Wales. The case was brought by Unison, the UK public workers union, and challenged the introduction in July 2013 of the requirement to pay a fee to lodge an employment tribunal claim. Having reviewed some of the key common law authorities and quoting from the Magna Carta and Donoghue v Stevenson no less, Lord Reed concluded that the fee regime was unlawful “because it has the effect of preventing access to justice”.[footnoteRef:2] This landmark decision in July 2017 brought an immediate end to the fee regime. Time will tell whether the UK Government will attempt another fee scheme in the future, but there are other more pressing issues occupying Whitehall at the moment. [1: R (on the application of Unison) (Appellant) v The Lord Chancellor (Respondent) [2017] UKSC 51 (Supreme Court). ] [2: Ibid paragraph 119.] The four-year fee regime and the Unison challenge brought access to justice in employment tribunals very much into the public eye. Other barriers to access were also widely discussed and reported, including the lack of legal aid and legal representation for claimants in employment law matters. A number of law clinics and pro bono schemes operate to give guidance and advice to the public, in addition to the essential work of ACAS (the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service). The purpose of this paper is to share with you my experience of a university student Streetlaw project at the Cardiff Employment Tribunal providing guidance to unrepresented claimants about tribunal practice and procedure. The concept of Streetlaw is familiar to readers of this Journal as a form of public legal education aimed at helping members of the public to understand their rights. It is also frequently referred to as “legal literacy”, the importance of which Richard Grimes explains in a previous edition of this Journal.[footnoteRef:3] The key aim of our Streetlaw project is to educate potential claimants about what to expect in the run up to their employment tribunal hearing and what happens on the day. As I shall explain, however, there are a number of secondary aims and several other beneficial outcomes. [3: Richard Grimes, 'Advancing legal education for all - the role of a journal' (2017) 1 International Journal of Public Legal Education 82.] The Project In 2017, Cardiff University joined forces with BPP Bristol, Swansea University and the University of South Wales (“USW”) to provide Streetlaw at the Cardiff Employment Tribunal. The purpose was to give a monthly guidance session at the tribunal which unrepresented parties could attend to find out about employment tribunal procedure and what to expect at their hearing. Small groups of students prepare a presentation and deliver it each month on a rota basis. The employment judiciary and tribunal staff advertise the sessions through various channels to encourage members of the public to take up the opportunity. A classic public legal education project – in Michal Urban’s words “citizenship education”.[footnoteRef:4] [4: Michal Urban, 'Why there is a need for Street Law programmes?' (2017) 1 International Journal of Public Legal Education 100.] The law school pro bono unit at BPP Birmingham had trialled the project at the Birmingham employment tribunals and wanted to expand it to allow their Bristol based students to participate. Cardiff employment judiciary expressed a keen interest, having noted the increasing number of unrepresented claimants appearing before them, and so the ball started rolling. Because of the commitment required, BPP wanted to share the project with other law schools, hence approaches to Cardiff, Swansea and USW. We therefore immediately had the advantages of an idea that was proving successful in another area, and the combined experience of four established student pro bono units, to get the scheme off the ground in Cardiff. This Streetlaw project is indebted to BPP for generously supplying the presentation materials, allowing us to adapt them for the Cardiff project, and for the introductory training session which they provided to all participating students and tutors at Cardiff. In the build up to the first year of the scheme (2017/18), there was a lot of discussion between the four project tutors as to design, presentation content and logistics of delivery. Whilst email traffic was useful, a few strategically timed conference calls between the collaborating universities’ tutors and members of the tribunal judiciary helped to clarify issues and move the plans forward. An early decision was made to combine the Birmingham bi-monthly presentation model into one monthly session that dealt with both the build up to a hearing and the hearing itself. This was based on the fact that the volume of cases heard at Cardiff was lower than Birmingham and therefore a smaller number of attendees was expected, and also the supposition that claimants may not be prepared to spend time and money travelling twice to the tribunal for two separate presentations. Each law school recruited six students for the project, with the idea that teams of three would deliver the monthly sessions at the tribunal. At Cardiff the students applied through our usual pro bono application process, providing a CV and the reasons why they were interested in Streetlaw. As it was the first year of the project at Cardiff, and there were a number of unknowns at this stage, the selection team chose six undergraduate students who had expressed an interest in an extra-curricular employment law scheme and were a mix of 2nd, 3rd and 4th year students. We felt that each team needed some students with the maturity and confidence that came with having completed a work placement year, or spending a year abroad as part of a law and languages degree. Other institutions formed teams of students from their postgraduate Legal Practice Courses. With the combined universities’ October training done and a schedule of monthly presentations at the employment tribunal agreed with the employment judiciary for November through to May, the next landmark was a run-through of the draft presentation at the employment tribunal before an employment judge. In the meantime, it was up to each law school to design and run the Streetlaw project with their chosen students. Design – the tutor’s role I was keen to employ a problem-based learning approach similar to ones that I had previously used for other pro bono student schemes. These had been based on my research into problem-based learning and problem solving (particularly the work of Exley and Dennick[footnoteRef:5] and Savin-Baden[footnoteRef:6]). Drawing on my experience and research and applying it in a rather different context, I planned a series of sessions with the students. I began with a tutor-led session, but progressively handed over responsibility to the student teams. I was keen to make the transition from teaching to facilitating, and from hands-on to soft-touch, to allow the students to develop their skills and confidence during the process. This was one of the aims of Streetlaw. In planning the sessions, I needed to take into account the students’ academic and personal commitments, as the whole project was extra-curricular. The consensus was to meet on Wednesday afternoons, as there was no teaching and it fitted with the employment tribunal practice and presentations, which were to be on Wednesdays. [5: Kate Exley and Reg Dennick, Small group teaching. (Routledge Falmer 2004).] [6: Maggi Savin-Baden, Problem-based learning in higher education: untold stories. (Society for research in higher education and Open University press 2000).] The first internal training session following the BPP general training afternoon was an opportunity for an ice-breaker, during which each student introduced themselves and explained why they had chosen Streetlaw. This helped the team to get to know each other as well as to give me an insight into their experience and motivation. It also revealed that one of the students was a Welsh speaker and we planned to use this at the presentation if the need arose. With the ultimate aim being the public presentations, I felt it important at the outset to get the students talking – if any would be put off by this it was better to find out at the start, and suggest transferring to an alternative pro bono project. We discussed and reflected on the previous week’s training. Then the students picked a couple of slides each to study and present. Following each short presentation, students provided brief peer review and I gave a little constructive feedback. At this stage it was important to instil confidence and encouragement, and I therefore emphasised the better skills that the students had shown and invited them all to emulate those. These included eye contact with the audience, speaking clearly and slowly, and showing interest in what they were saying. We also discussed the underlying employment law and procedure and, as an employment law tutor, I was able to help the students understand the context in which the presentation was set. Some of the students were already coming up with suggestions for amendment and improvement of the presentation slides and we planned to discuss this at the next training session. In the meantime, the students agreed which slides they would each practise to be ready to present at the run-through in the tribunal the following week. The next Wednesday session was an opportunity for the students to practise presenting in front of each other and me, before doing it in front of the employment judge later that week. The students were engaged and had practised their part of the presentation – some had written notes or bullet point prompts to help them remember what to say. I was fine with this approach as the subject matter was new to all of the students and it was early days in terms of preparing and practising for the public presentations. Attending the tribunal for the run-through was a great experience for the students. Working in close partnership with the employment judiciary is an important element of this Streetlaw project. Arriving at the tribunal to be welcomed with a bag search and body scan was an eye-opener for the students and to be shown around an actual tribunal hearing room and meet an employment judge made the whole project come alive. Exposing students to “law in the real world” is the underlying concept of all of our pro bono schemes at Cardiff. The run-through was a shared experience with the collaborating law schools and an opportunity for tutors and students to share ideas and reflect on each other’s practices. The feedback from the judge on the content and delivery of the presentation was invaluable in ensuring that the law and procedure were up to date and relevant to the practice at the Cardiff Employment Tribunal, knowing that there are some procedural and practical variations at different venues. At the next training session back at the University, we reflected on the run-though at the tribunal and the employment judge’s feedback. The judge suggested reducing the content of some of the slides to make them more “public friendly”, and preferred those parts of the presentation that addressed the audience as “you”. The students also had other ideas about altering slides, simplifying some concepts, improving their own speaker notes and generally engaging fully with the task at hand. They showed a competence and confidence which allowed me to start stepping back from a tutor-led approach. I was able to invite them to plan the next few practice sessions in the lead up to their first public presentation. I handed over to the students responsibility for splitting the team between the two allocated presentations, and liaising with each other about updates to slides and delivery. Facebook and WhatsApp make this sort of communication exercise very easy for students. There is a sense of freedom when leading an extra-curricular activity such as this. I did not feel hide-bound to have a tutor-led and assessment-driven approach. However, I did have a sound pedagogical basis with clear aims and objectives and learning outcomes that became more visible and greater in number as the project progressed. The next few sessions were therefore very much student-led. I booked a training room at the same time each week and left the students to organise their activities. They let me know when they needed my input, and every so often I attended part of their sessions to help out with employment law queries, affirm proposed changes to slides, listen to part of the presentation and give feedback on delivery skills. This also gave me an opportunity to update the students on the logistics of the public presentations and the feedback from the other law school groups who had delivered monthly presentations ahead of Cardiff. Whilst the students can be left alone to find a way of working, develop teamwork skills, give each other peer review feedback, and enjoy the freedom of this type of project, the input of a tutor is important for the smooth running of the project and to ensure that the aims and objectives are properly achieved. Being a specialist in the field of employment law and having contacts with the judiciary and ACAS was a definite advantage. As Urban acknowledges[footnoteRef:7], these programmes need to be co-run by university academic staff to ensure that they continue and are sustainable. I agree, and would emphasise the need to be there in the background overseeing the project, being a quality check at certain key stages and ultimately to ensure delivery of the learning outcomes. The benefit of feed forward into the following year cannot be underestimated either, as I shall explain below in relation to Year 2 of Streetlaw. It is also essential that the students do not misinform the public as, if acted on, this could lead to unwelcome legal implications. [7: Michal Urban, 'Why there is a need for Street Law programmes?' (2017) 1 International Journal of Public Legal Education 101.] Our allocated public presentation dates were consecutive ones in February and March 2018. On the day of the first public presentation, I met the February student team for their final rehearsal. I was pleased to see that they were well-practised, both individually and together, so the presentation was coherent, and clear. The three students had split the presentation into two halves, each of three parts. They alternated the delivery between them to keep it fresh and interesting. Through practice and feedback, their presentation skills had improved over the months to produce an engaging submission. My feedback at this stage was encouragement, confidence and a reminder to consciously slow their speech down, as we are all inclined to speed up a little when faced with an audience. It was no surprise that the ET presentation went well. A pleasing number of members of the public attended and engaged with questions. The students managed questions by answering those that sought clarity on something they had said, and directing others to the ACAS representative also present to assist. The latter was invaluable in fielding a number of questions beyond the guidance that the students had given, and their input to an exercise like this is essential. I acted as chair in relation to some of the questions asked, directing them to the students to the extent that they were within the scope of their guidance, or to ACAS if beyond that and leaning towards advice. The public’s response The students start their presentation by explaining that the aim of Streetlaw is to demystify the law to members of the public. We wanted to know if this had been achieved and asked the attendees to complete a short feedback ticket before leaving the presentation. All were very positive – for example, “It was a thorough and informative presentation, thank you”, “Excellent presentation on the process, well done to the students” and “Answered all questions very well and clearly”. This was a welcome reward for the February student team, and we brought it to the next training session to show and encourage the March team. The February team also reported back on their experience and gave the March team some tips to help them with their presentation. This continued the element of group work and peer review that formed a significant part of the Streetlaw project. The March team organised a few more practices amongst themselves, and we had a dress rehearsal on the afternoon of the presentation. As with the February team, by this stage praise and encouragement were the order of the day, and the team were well ready for their public appearance. It was equally competent and well received by the attendees – for example, “Helped relieve some of the concerns I had”, “The students helped to make it a less daunting experience and helped to see the room set up”, and “Gave me an opportunity to ask questions about the process and give a better insight into the hearing day itself”. So a job well done, with the attendees again endorsing the students’ public legal education project. The student perspective The premise that undergraduate students with little or no knowledge of employment law or tribunal procedure give guidance to members of the public facing an employment tribunal process may seem a strange one, but these are keen law students with a hunger for real world experiences, wanting to impress, and able to view the employment law material at the outset as the lay person may see it. Through the project, the students developed their knowledge and understanding of employment law and procedure, but the newness of it helped them to present it to the public in an accessible way. It was a new skill to add to the armoury of students whose experience was previously limited to discussing and presenting to fellow law students and law tutors. At the end of the project, the students were asked to undertake a reflection on their involvement, in line with students completing all of our pro bono schemes. Being the first year of the Streetlaw project, I did not know what to expect but felt that it was a necessary step to assist with reviewing the project, checking whether the learning outcomes had been achieved, and improving it for the following year. Here are some of the students’ comments: What did you particularly enjoy about it? “It felt like you were actually helping people who were in genuine need of support in a time of confusion and stress” – one of the fundamental concepts of public legal education. “It allowed me to learn about an area of law which was not an optional module and it also allowed me to improve my presentation skills in a friendly environment” – advantages and skill development for students. “I enjoyed the flexibility around it” – enabled by its extra-curricular nature. Would you suggest any changes for future students? “Going to the employment tribunal to watch a real procedure would have been helpful. We talked about going as a group but never did” – the students were encouraged to view a live case but, being an extra-curricular activity, they found it difficult to set aside further time for this. “Little and often is the best – read through the lecture slides regularly so you become familiar with them” – this was practical training advice for the following year’s students. Have you used your experience of the project in application forms, interviews etc., and if so how, and with what success? “Yes. All employers I have discussed Streetlaw with have taken a genuine interest in the project and have so far managed to secure a paralegal role with [named firm]. I think the reason they took interest is because unlike academic study, you are learning how the process works in the real world. It’s also a great opportunity to practise your presentation skills” – a great endorsement for the employability benefits of participating in the Streetlaw project. “Yes, it has provided me with relevant legal work experience and lots of transferable skills so I have included it on my CV and applications forms” – again, the students are improving their employability. I also provided several references for students’ applications for work experience or further study. Do you have any other comments about the experience? “It’s a flexible pro bono project which is not too time consuming, something which was useful for me as I had a busy timetable in the first semester”. “The whole experience was relaxed and enjoyable from the beginning”. “The experience is definitely worthwhile. Not only is it a great CV booster and a chance to refine your presentational skills but it is also a chance to really help someone in what might be the most stressful process they will go through” – an accurate summary of the value of the Streetlaw project as both an educational tool and a public legal education project. In thinking about Streetlaw and composing these comments the students went through the process of reflection. We are all aware of the importance of self-reflection and there are several useful texts available to help students (and tutors) to reflect on their work in general and specific projects. Key texts I recommend to students are Schon[footnoteRef:8] and Boud, Keogh and Walker[footnoteRef:9] which are suitable for dipping into to develop a sense of the reflective process. [8: Donald A Schon, The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think In Action (Routledge 2016).] [9: David Boud, Rosemary Keogh and David Walker, Reflection: turning experience into learning (Taylor and Francis 2013).] Judicial support Strong support and involvement from the employment judiciary is an essential component of Streetlaw in the Employment Tribunal. The local judiciary were a driving force in initiating the project, and supporting it throughout. Happily, they were also pleased with the outcomes – “I just wanted to thank everyone for their enthusiasm and support for the Streetlaw scheme – it has been a very useful addition to the range of ways we can signpost support/advice to litigants in person…I hope that the colleges/universities will want to continue with the scheme next academic year”. [Employment Judge at Cardiff Employment Tribunal]. This was confirmation that the employment judiciary agreed that Streetlaw was a success for citizenship education. Year 2 With ringing endorsements from the people who attended and the employment judiciary about this public legal education initiative, all stakeholders were keen to take Streetlaw into its second year. Despite changes in project leadership at a couple of the law schools, we were able to feed forward the experiences and reflections of Year 1 to adopt a much more efficient approach to setting up and running Year 2. The structure was in place and the links between stakeholders established, so planning time was markedly reduced. This was good from my point of view as an academic, with increasing pressures on workload and accountability being felt across universities. Each law school selected students for the project and we all came together in Cardiff again for the initial training from BPP. This was followed by training and practice sessions within each participating law school and a run-through again kindly hosted by the employment judiciary at Cardiff Employment Tribunal. As with the second year of any course or project, there is less wasted time, a better focus, more efficient use of materials and overall a smoother delivery. I was able to cut by half the number of hours the project took me, comparing Year 2 with Year 1, with no drop in the effectiveness of Streetlaw for students or public. There were some new challenges, however, for the second year. The main one was that the students who had expressed an interest in Streetlaw were just starting their second year at Cardiff, and were not the confident final year students who had formed the majority in Year 1. I therefore planned a softer start to the project, but with a view to moving from tutor-led sessions to facilitation of student only sessions as soon as felt appropriate to ensure the learning outcomes were achieved. At the first training session, I orchestrated a soft ice-breaker, to allow each student a voice. This worked well and allowed us to progress to a group discussion about the skills and benefits the students expected to gain from being involved in Streetlaw. I had the benefit of knowing the outcomes achieved in Year 1, but was interested to know what the Year 2 students expected at the outset. Later, I say how these expectations were realised and surpassed, which was rewarding. The following week, we watched and listened to part of the presentation that the Year 1 students had recorded, to give the Year 2 students an idea of what the project entailed. It was useful to have the benefit of Year 1’s materials and recording. I followed this by asking each student in turn to stand and talk about their home town or similar for two minutes. The purpose was to encourage confidence and team building, whilst checking the initial level of presentation skills. This was followed by a gentle discussion on the skill of presenting, with the students contributing their views on good and bad aspects and areas for improvement. I was pleased that all six students in the group felt able to stand in front of their peers and speak – a good start – and we learnt about six different towns across five different countries! Something else new for Year 2 was my request that the students took responsibility for producing minutes of each of our sessions. It is another way of giving ownership of the project to the students, as well as them learning a new skill of minute taking and distribution. The students took it in turns to produce and circulate a brief minutes of each of our sessions. This was useful week-to-week to map progress, and also a handy record for the students at the end of the project when they were writing their reflections. I encouraged students to keep a file of these minutes and the project materials, to help them with their reflection, and indeed their CV or application forms at a later date. The project progressed along the lines of Year 1 from then on and the students gained in confidence as they gradually took over the sessions – working on the presentation, making amendments and improvements, splitting it up between them and practising and giving feedback to each other. I was able to withdraw to merely keeping a watching brief from time to time. In Year 2, Cardiff had one presentation at the tribunal and this worked in our favour as the six students could split it between them, rather than having a third each (over two presentations) as in Year 1. It probably suited the less experienced group of Year 2 students, allowing them a taste of public presentation without giving them too much exposure. Consequently, the public Streetlaw session at the tribunal went well and was well received – “Confidence giving”, “Clear presentation – all questions answered”, and “Supportive”. It therefore achieved its public legal education aims. Year 2 student reflection With the public presentation complete, and recordings of part 1 and part 2 of the presentation made back at the University, the students were invited to reflect on the Streetlaw project. Here are some of their responses: What did you particularly enjoy about it? “Learning about a different area of law was very worthwhile and I was surprised to find the extent to which I enjoyed the giving of the presentation itself”. “I particularly enjoyed learning how to present orally. Before this project, I had never done public speaking”. “I enjoyed working as part of a group”. “I enjoyed being able to present information that can genuinely help or make a difference to someone’s case”. What skills and benefits have you gained from the project? The students referred to a number of important skills here – communication skills, confidence, time management, presenting, public speaking, working independently and as part of a group, professionalism. Some of these the students had anticipated in the first training session, but others were unexpected and welcome. All mentioned the gaining of confidence, which was something that this group of students was lacking and therefore had more to gain from the project in this respect. Would you suggest any changes for future students? There was nothing of substance to feed forward here. A typical response was - “I do not have any changes to suggest to future students as the project was very enjoyable and ran smoothly”. Have you used or do you intend to use your experience of the project in application forms, interviews etc., and if so how, and with what success? “I have already used the project as an example for legal experience in a mini-pupillage application. I have also included the project on my CV and all the skills gained from it”. “I intend to use it in application forms and interviews for vacation schemes and training contracts. I would use this experience to highlight team work and communication skills”. “I feel this project has enhanced my employability prospects as I have built on my existing skills, and learnt new skills which are valuable to employers”. “I feel it would help set me apart from other candidates. Additionally it showcases a lot of different skills”. All evidence of a worthwhile project from the students’ perspective. Do you have any other comments about Streetlaw? “It massively improved my confidence”. “It was a great opportunity to be able to practise in front of a judge at the ET and then to deliver the presentation to unrepresented claimants”. “It was a very valuable and worthwhile experience”. “It has been very enjoyable and hugely worthwhile”. The students recognised the value not only to themselves, but also in terms of enhancing the legal literacy of members of the public facing the tribunal process. Expected consequences The collaborating law schools and the local employment judiciary had set out with several aims and outcomes in mind. After 2 years of the project, I have looked back and reflected on what we achieved. The main expected consequences are first considered. An important outcome shared by the University and the students themselves is that the students develop skills, and their confidence, and furthermore their employability. As Nick Touati remarks, undertaking pro bono work and participating in extra-curricular activities give students “skills and experience that will be valued by employers far beyond the legal industry.”[footnoteRef:10] The student reflections above show that this outcome was certainly achieved through this extra-curricular activity which gave them a feel of pro bono, public presentation skills, confidence and self-esteem, and an opportunity to reflect. It truly was experiential learning in Streetlaw style. [10: Nick Touati, 'Opportunities on the horizon for law students' (2016) 160/25 Solicitors Journal 15.] As a public legal education project, it was also an essential outcome that Streetlaw delivered on legal literacy. The attendees’ feedback shows that this was successful – giving unrepresented claimants an opportunity to gain information about the employment tribunal procedure and process, ask questions, and meet ACAS conciliation officers, all in a real tribunal hearing room. It helped to de-mystify employment law and procedure, which was a key aim of our Streetlaw project. As an academic, I enjoyed the opportunity to test a variety of teaching and learning styles through an extra-curricular activity that did not have the strict boundaries of assessment or examination. There was a common general approach across Year 1 and Year 2 of the project, but some alterations due to the different make-up of the student teams and the added efficiency that Year 2 brought. The students’ reflections indicate that they welcomed the approach and the flexibility. For ACAS it was an opportunity to provide information about the services ACAS provides and links to other employment law guidance. To strengthen my links with ACAS was an anticipated outcome, as early on in the planning process the employment judiciary brought ACAS on board and arranged for them to attend each presentation. This turned out much better than expected, as ACAS provided one or two experienced conciliation officers for each presentation, and they were invaluable in giving guidance to the attendees on employment tribunal matters beyond the scope of the students’ presentation. ACAS also played a role in advertising the sessions and informing unrepresented claimants who approached them for advice about the sessions. A driving force for the employment judiciary was to educate prospective unrepresented claimants before they came to their hearing. This was achieved, helping the judges by having more informed and better prepared claimants before them. This has the knock-on effect of saving the tribunal’s time and the ultimate goal of improving access to justice. In addition, my links with the employment judiciary were strengthened resulting in offers by the judges to come and talk to students at the University, and inviting students to observe proceedings at the tribunal and talk to them there. The input and encouragement of the judiciary went beyond our expectation as I mention below. Unexpected outcomes In reflecting on our Streetlaw project, I also identified a number of unexpected outcomes, the principal of which are mentioned below. We had an existing relationship with LawWorks, the solicitors’ pro bono group, and they contacted us in Year 1 with an invitation for students to attend a talk on the fundamentals of employment law. This was a great opportunity for our Streetlaw students to improve their employment law knowledge and they, and a number of our other law clinic students, signed up for the talk. As it was held at the offices of Eversheds Sutherland, it was an unexpected treat for the students to see inside a solicitors’ office (and sample their buffet offering!). The bond with Law Works was strengthened in Year 2 of the project, as I offered to provide an Introduction to Employment Law talk for the students, and opened it up to all local pro bono clinic volunteers. It was well attended, and served not only as a context for my Streetlaw students, but also those from the other institutions and several other clinic volunteers wanting to find out about employment law. So it was a further opportunity for legal literacy, beyond the Streetlaw project. The students’ rehearsal at the tribunal in front of an employment judge was offered in the planning stage as, for their part, the judiciary wanted to make sure that the content and delivery would be appropriate for a presentation to unrepresented claimants in a tribunal room. Our students not only met an employment judge at the rehearsal, however, as on the day of their presentation one of our teams was greeted by the Regional Judge in person, who took the time to speak to them and thank them for taking part. The students were impressed with this and felt it added value to the whole experience. Some of them shared their enthusiasm with friends and fellow students on social media, which helped to raise the profile of the project. I have already mentioned the freedom I welcome as an academic in this project, and the experience is all the more fulfilling for the challenges it throws up – for example, being outside the traditional classroom environment, collaboration with other law schools, and testing different methods of teaching and learning. The added bonus of participation in pro bono, strengthening links with practice, and improving my own understanding of employment law and practice, also deserve a mention. Final conclusion In conclusion, I recommend Streetlaw to you, for all the reasons I have discussed in this paper. Employment law and the employment tribunal are the context for this Streetlaw project, but the possibilities are endless. I encourage you to explore the creation of a Streetlaw project in your academic field. For my part, bring on Year 3 of Streetlaw in the Employment Tribunal! Acknowledgments I wish to acknowledge and thank those without whom this project would not exist nor be a success. The employment judiciary at Cardiff Employment Tribunal for initiating and encouraging the idea and supporting it throughout. BPP Law School for providing materials and experience from a sister project and for giving the initial training. The law schools of BPP Bristol, Swansea University and University of South Wales for participating and collaborating in a supportive and constructive way to make Streetlaw a success. The conciliation officers from ACAS Cardiff who attend and support all of the public presentations. The staff at Cardiff Employment Tribunal for enabling the logistics and smooth running of Streetlaw. LawWorks for providing and supporting training on employment law. Last, but by no means least, the students and staff at Cardiff University who engage in and support Streetlaw. 50