Claimant v Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the offered alternative employment was not objectively suitable because the claimant lacked the essential qualifications and post-qualification training in adult personality disorder required for the senior leadership role. The claimant also had sound and justifiable reasons to refuse the offer, including professional concerns about practising outside his competence, loss of status, and the need for substantial career retraining over an uncertain timeframe. The claimant did not act unreasonably in refusing the post.
Facts
The claimant was a Clinical Lead/Consultant Child and Adolescent Psychotherapist (Band 8b) whose service (NCS) was closed by the respondent NHS Trust in 2023. The respondent offered him an alternative post as Principal Clinical/Counselling Psychologist in an adult Personality Disorder service at the same grade and pay, plus one day per week in a CAMHS inpatient unit to maintain his professional registration. The claimant lacked post-qualification training and direct experience in adult personality disorder—an essential criterion for the role—and would require a development plan estimated to take six months to five years to achieve full competence. He refused the offer citing professional concerns about practising outside his competence, loss of status, and complex dual accountability arrangements.
Decision
The tribunal found the offered post was not objectively suitable alternative employment because the claimant lacked essential qualifications and specialist experience required for the senior leadership role in adult personality disorder services. Even if it were suitable, the claimant had sound and justifiable reasons to refuse: he could not in professional conscience accept a role requiring him to lead others in a field where he lacked competence, and the offer represented a loss of status from established specialist to learner. The tribunal awarded the claimant his statutory redundancy payment of £11,895.50.
Practical note
An offer of alternative employment at the same grade and pay may still be objectively unsuitable where it requires a senior professional to work outside their area of expertise and professional competence, particularly where essential qualifications are lacking and significant retraining is required.
Award breakdown
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6004626/2024
- Decision date
- 5 March 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Clinical Lead/Consultant Child and Adolescent Psychotherapist
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister