Claimant v Virgin Atlantic Airways Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found dismissals of senior cabin crew (MS claimants, Paula Lin, TC12, Lyndsey Stevenson) were procedurally unfair due to the complexity of the computer-based selection programme (calculations to 15 decimal places), inadequate time for crew to understand their data, and no provisional selection stage ('you have been selected for redundancy' on 11/6/2020 was final). However, need for redundancies was justified and selection criteria agreed with Unite were fair.
The tribunal found VAA had not unlawfully selected older cabin crew or protected younger cabin crew. No evidence that age played any part in the redundancy process; VAA acted in difficult circumstances without ulterior motive.
Tribunal found no indirect age discrimination. The selection criteria and process, though complex and procedurally flawed, was not designed to disadvantage older employees and most aspects were agreed with Unite.
MS claimants withdrew all direct sex discrimination claims (issues 41.4, 45, 46, 47, 56, 57, 58) on 11/7/2024.
MS claimants withdrew all indirect sex discrimination claims on 11/7/2024.
Claims of detriment contrary to s.43C ERA (related to statutory leave) failed and were dismissed.
Claims under Part-Time Worker (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 failed and were dismissed. No less favourable treatment due to part-time working was established.
Facts
Virgin Atlantic Airways faced severe financial pressure during the Covid-19 pandemic and announced large-scale redundancies on 5/5/2020 affecting approximately 1,692 cabin crew across two phases. Selection criteria (on-board performance, conduct, absence, punctuality, loyalty) were agreed with Unite the Union following collective consultation on 19/5/2020. Over 400 claims were presented by cabin crew who were made redundant, with 12 test cases selected for hearing. VAA used a complex computer programme based on Voice of Customer data, performance monitoring, and other criteria, with calculations running to 15 decimal places which proved difficult for crew to understand and replicate.
Decision
The tribunal found that while the need for redundancies was justified and the selection criteria agreed with Unite were fair, the dismissals of senior cabin crew (MS claimants and some others) were procedurally unfair due to: the excessive complexity of the scoring system; inadequate time for crew to understand their data; and the absence of provisional selection (crew were told definitively 'you have been selected for redundancy' on 11/6/2020). However, all discrimination claims failed as the tribunal found no evidence that age or sex influenced the process, and VAA had no ulterior motive.
Practical note
Even when redundancy selection criteria are fair and agreed with unions, excessive complexity in scoring methodology (e.g. calculations to 15 decimal places) and failure to provide intelligible data to employees in sufficient time before making final selection decisions can render dismissals procedurally unfair, despite the employer acting without malicious intent in a crisis.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2304618/2020
- Decision date
- 10 January 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 30
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- transport
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Cabin Crew
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- multiple