An often-overlooked aspect of redundancy is the duty on employers to explore redeployment opportunities for employees at risk. The duty is implied through the requirement to act reasonably under the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA). Failing to consider or support redeployment can lead to findings of unfair dismissal, even where there is a genuine redundancy situation.
It was under this requirement that Hendy Group Ltd went wrong, resulting in an award for a former employee of £19,566 in compensation for loss of earnings for unfair dismissal.
Daniel Kennedy had worked for Hendy Group Ltd, a car dealership chain, since 2013. After initially working in used car sales and, after successfully managing a new Kia distributorship, he moved into a trainer role in the company’s Training Academy in 2015.
In 2020, a genuine redundancy situation arose within the training team, and Kennedy was fairly selected for redundancy. He accepted both the redundancy situation and his selection as fair. The issue wasn’t whether he could be made redundant, but how the process was handled.
The Employment Tribunal found that Hendy Group failed in its fundamental duty to consider alternative employment for Kennedy. Rather than actively helping Kennedy find alternative roles within the company, human resources (HR) simply told him he could apply for positions advertised on the company website, treating him no differently to external candidates. When Kennedy was required to return his laptop a week after being given notice, he lost access to internal email and the company intranet, which made his search more difficult.
During Kennedy’s seven-week notice period, multiple sales positions were available within the group. Despite Kennedy’s 30 years’ experience in motor trade sales and his proven track record, the company made no effort to actively consider him for these roles. Most damaging was an email sent by HR on 3 November 2020, stating that because Kennedy hadn’t been successful in one interview (where his motivation was questioned), he would not be considered for any other sales roles within the group.
The Tribunal Judge noted:
“This was the human resources department, which should have been supporting Mr Kennedy in a search for an alternative to dismissal, instead saying that they would not give him any sales role anywhere. This to a man who had spent 35 years selling cars, or training people how to sell cars.”
Remember that in a redundancy situation, the statutory requirement to act reasonably includes:
- Actively looking for suitable alternative employment within the organisation (and in associated companies where appropriate).
- Informing employees of vacancies and supporting them to apply.
- Objectively assessing whether roles might be suitable, rather than placing the burden entirely on the employee.
Failure to take these steps can render an otherwise fair redundancy unfair.
If you are managing a redundancy process or considering redeployment options, our legal helpline can guide you, and our HR software can help track vacancies and consultations. If you have faced a similar issue, why not call our legal team at Lawgistics?
On average 55 vulnerabilities are identified daily.
What can I do?
Review your organisations priorities and ask ‘can we afford a breach?’. What do I do during an incident? Who do I involve? When do I involve the ICO?
If you’re unable to answers these questions, you need help from the experts.
