Redundancy
This case serves as a warning to employers always to calculate redundancy selection scores carefully, as mistakes can render a dismissal unfair even if they are identified only after the employee's appeal.
Claire Benson, Rebekah Martin and Poppy Fildes, associates at Addleshaw Goddard, detail the latest rulings.
A 62-year-old worker who was made redundant was awarded over £27,000 for age discrimination and unfair dismissal, in a stark warning for employers that allow their redundancy selection procedure to be tainted by age bias.
The Fair Employment Tribunal in Northern Ireland has awarded a Protestant teacher who was made redundant £8,250 for religious discrimination.
This case deals with a common issue in redundancy situations: the discounting of disability-related absences when scoring against a "sickness absence" criterion.
If a redundant employee unreasonably rejects an offer of suitable alternative employment, he or she will not be entitled to a statutory redundancy payment. This case is a short and clear example of the factors that a tribunal will weigh up when determining this issue.
Niki Walker, managing associate at Addleshaw Goddard, details the latest rulings.
In Shanahan Engineering v Unite the Union EAT/0411/09, the EAT held that an employment tribunal was right to find that, in relation to collective redundancy consultation, although a customer's instruction amounted to "special circumstances", absolving the employer of the need to start consultation 30 days in advance of the first redundancy, it did not absolve it of all obligations to consult. However, the tribunal should have taken into account the special circumstances of the case in setting the level of the protective award.
Susannah Jarvis (associate) and Kate Williams (professional support lawyer), Addleshaw Goddard, analyse important recent rulings.
In Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Wooster EAT/0441/08, the EAT upheld a finding that the redundancy dismissal of a 49-year-old employee amounted to age discrimination. The tribunal was entitled to find that the employer could have found alternative work for him, but that it had failed to do so because it was concerned that, if he remained employed up to the age of 50, he would be entitled to a more generous early retirement package.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to redundancy.