Claimant v Control & Skills Authority Limited (formerly Association of Cost Engineers Limited)
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the reason for dismissal was redundancy, a potentially fair reason. The respondent adequately warned and consulted the claimant over three meetings, adopted a reasonable selection pool of two interchangeable Administration Assistants, applied fair selection criteria (technical capability, administration skills, quality of work, communication, attitude, productivity, extra effort), and there were no suitable alternative roles in the small organisation. The dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses despite the claimant's 18 years' service and previous positive appraisals.
Facts
The claimant was employed as a part-time Administration Assistant for 18 years by a small professional association. In June 2024, all three administrative staff went off sick. While covering their work, directors concluded fewer staff were needed due to system modernisation and reduced workload. After one employee resigned, the respondent placed the claimant and the remaining Administration Assistant (Mrs Jackson) in a redundancy pool. Following consultation and scoring on seven criteria, the claimant scored 18 versus Mrs Jackson's 20 and was dismissed on 26 July 2024. Mrs Jackson subsequently did not return to work and left in September 2024.
Decision
The tribunal found the dismissal was for genuine redundancy as the respondent's requirement for administrative work had diminished due to modernisation. The respondent acted within the band of reasonable responses: it pooled two employees doing interchangeable work, applied fair selection criteria based on recent performance, conducted three consultation meetings, and reasonably concluded no alternative roles existed in the small organisation. The unfair dismissal claim failed.
Practical note
Even long-serving employees with unblemished records can be fairly dismissed for redundancy if the employer demonstrates genuine diminution of work, applies fair selection criteria, and conducts reasonable consultation, regardless of previous positive appraisals covering earlier periods.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6011425/2024
- Decision date
- 27 May 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- No
- Rep type
- in house
Employment details
- Role
- Administration Assistant
- Service
- 18 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No