Claimant v Alexander Mann Solutions Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
Tribunal found the claimant did not offer or prove primary facts from which it could properly and fairly conclude that any difference in treatment was because of her gender. The respondent's redundancy selection process, scoring, and dismissal were based on performance assessment and matrix scoring, not sex. No evidence of gender bias was established.
Facts
The claimant was a Team Leader employed from November 2021 who was dismissed for redundancy on 27 June 2023 following a Santander account resizing. The respondent used a matrix scoring system to select 3 Team Leaders from a pool of 5 for new redesigned roles. The claimant scored 20 (later revised to 28 on appeal) compared to Mr. McMenemy's 28 on competency matrix and scored 7 versus his 11 on the standard matrix due to a lower performance review rating and an ongoing Informal Individual Support Plan. She was not selected and was dismissed.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all claims of direct sex discrimination. The claimant failed to prove primary facts from which the tribunal could conclude that differences in treatment (scoring, failure to notify of vacancy, selection of Mr. McMenemy, or dismissal) were because of her sex. The tribunal found the respondent's redundancy process and scoring were performance-based with no evidence of gender bias.
Practical note
A claimant alleging sex discrimination in redundancy selection must provide primary facts showing a causal link between protected characteristic and treatment; mere differences in scoring compared to a male comparator are insufficient without evidence of gender bias.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3313253/2023
- Decision date
- 22 January 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Team Leader
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No