Claimant v Forest Circuit of the Methodist Church
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the redundancy situation was genuine, that Reverend Long reasonably believed the role was no longer required due to the Circuit almost halving in size and work becoming more digital. The Claimant was properly consulted, given advance warning, and a fair appeal process. The dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses and the process was conducted fairly.
The tribunal found, after reviewing the complete payslip history provided at hearing, that the Claimant was paid two weeks in advance and two weeks in arrears each month. The final payment of £681 in March 2024 correctly reflected payment for the 15 days worked, and the Claimant was paid in full up to her departure date.
The tribunal found that the Respondent's historic errors in pension enrollment caused financial loss to the Claimant in terms of lost employer contributions and lost interest on pension. The tribunal held that unauthorised deduction of employee pension contributions is an unauthorised deduction from wages and/or breach of contract. There was an agreement between the parties on the amount owed, but insufficient evidence that it had been paid.
Facts
The Claimant was employed as a part-time Circuit Administrator from February 2016 to March 2024, working 18 hours per week. Throughout her employment there were multiple errors regarding pay rises and pension enrollment, undermining her trust. In May 2023 she was consulted about redundancy as the Circuit had almost halved in size and administrative work had reduced. In September 2023, Reverend Long reviewed the proposals and decided the role was no longer needed at all. The Claimant was dismissed for redundancy in March 2024 after consultation and a fair appeal process. She claimed unfair dismissal, believing it was motivated by her complaints about pay and pension, and also claimed unauthorised deductions from her final pay and losses from pension errors.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim, finding the redundancy was genuine and the process fair, falling within the range of reasonable responses. The claim regarding final pay deduction also failed as payslip evidence showed the Claimant was paid in full. However, the claim regarding pension losses succeeded, with the tribunal finding that unauthorised deduction of employee pension contributions amounts to unlawful deduction from wages and/or breach of contract, and that there was insufficient evidence the agreed settlement amount had been paid.
Practical note
A redundancy dismissal can be fair even where there is a pool of one and historic employment relationship issues exist, provided the employer genuinely believes the role is no longer required and follows fair procedures including proper consultation and appeal rights.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3201253/2024
- Decision date
- 14 April 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- charity
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Circuit Administrator
- Service
- 8 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No