Can a cold, unsympathetic approach to consulting with an employee on his or her potential redundancy ultimately result in an unfair dismissal? That was the quandary for the EAT in Thomas v BNP Paribas Real Estate Advisory and Property Management UK Ltd.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that an employment tribunal failed to consider whether or not the "perfunctory" and "insensitive" nature of a long-serving employee's redundancy consultation made his dismissal unfair.
Updated to include information on Khan v Stripestar Ltd, in which the EAT considered the extent to which a defective disciplinary process can be cured through an appeal; and Grayson v Paycare concerning the correct approach to a Polkey reduction.
Victoria Bell is managing associate and Gerri Hurst, Carly Mather and Andrew Nealey are associates and Eleanor Cittern is a trainee solicitor at Addleshaw Goddard LLP.
David Malamatenios is a partner and Colin Makin, Linda Quinn, Krishna Santra and Sandra Martins are associates at Colman Coyle Solicitors. They round up the latest rulings.
Victoria Bell is a managing associate and Chris McAvoy, Poppy Fildes, Rosie Kight and Helen Samuel are associate solicitors at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
The employment tribunal held that the employer discriminated against the claimant on the ground of age by making him redundant because he was close to retirement. The tribunal drew an inference of age bias against the claimant from workplace banter related to age, including colleagues nicknaming him "Yoda".
Carly Mather, Lydia Newman and Amy Ross-Sercombe are associates and Amanda Steadman is a professional support lawyer at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
A table summarising the potentially fair reasons for dismissal.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that, where the employer put an employee into a redundancy "pool of one" and did not consider the possibility of putting a wider pool of employees at risk of redundancy, the employment tribunal did not properly consider whether or not restricting the pool to one fell within the "range of reasonable responses".
HR and legal information and guidance relating to dismissals where the reason for the dismissal is that the employee was redundant.