Claimant v CSY Architects Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim presented out of time and was not pursued by the claimant at the final hearing.
Notice pay claim presented out of time and was not pursued by the claimant at the final hearing.
Holiday pay claim presented out of time and was not pursued by the claimant at the final hearing.
Tribunal found that the respondent discharged its burden of proving the claimant was dismissed for performance reasons, not redundancy. The respondent's requirement for Senior Architects had not ceased, diminished or was expected to diminish. The reason for dismissal was dissatisfaction with the claimant's performance in three of five areas raised in April 2023: managing workload to meet deadlines, allocating time proportionately and efficiently, and communicating effectively with colleagues.
Facts
Claimant was employed as a part-time Senior Architect from April 2017. Following annual review in April 2023, performance concerns were raised about his productivity, workload management, time allocation and communication. These concerns were documented and discussed in subsequent review meetings in June 2023, May 2024. Despite some improvement in two of five areas, the respondent concluded insufficient progress had been made by May 2024 and dismissed the claimant with one month's notice, with effect from 30 June 2024. The respondent offered self-employed consultancy work which the claimant declined. Claimant brought claims including statutory redundancy payment.
Decision
Tribunal found the respondent discharged its burden under s.163(2) ERA 1996 of proving the dismissal was not by reason of redundancy. The respondent's requirement for Senior Architects had not ceased or diminished. The reason for dismissal was performance concerns about the claimant's productivity and working practices which had been raised over a 13-month period. The redundancy payment claim was dismissed.
Practical note
A reference to 'financial strain' in a dismissal letter does not automatically indicate redundancy where the strain arises from an individual employee's underperformance rather than business-wide financial difficulties or reduced staffing requirements.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 4106856/2024
- Decision date
- 20 March 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- in house
Employment details
- Role
- Senior Architect
- Service
- 7 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep