In Barlow v Horwich Farrelly Solicitors, an employment tribunal held that the employee had not been unfairly dismissed for redundancy when she was placed in a pool of one and the employer rejected bumping for genuine and sound reasons.
Joe Beeston, Kate Edminson, Rosie Kight and David Rintoul are associate solicitors and Iain Naylor is a trainee solicitor at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings. They round up the latest rulings.
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".
In Lomond Motors Ltd v Clark EATS/0019/09, the EAT held that an employment tribunal had erred in finding a dismissal unfair on the grounds that the redundancy selection pool had been incorrectly drawn. The tribunal had substituted its own view for that of a reasonable employer. The tribunal had further erred in its assessment of compensation.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to redundancy pools.
XpertHR® is part of the LexisNexis® Risk Solutions portfolio of brands.
The materials and information included in the XpertHR service are provided for reference purposes only. They are not intended either as a substitute for professional advice or judgment or to provide legal or other advice with respect to particular circumstances. Use of the service is subject to our terms and conditions.
Copyright © 2023 LexisNexis Risk Solutions
© 2023 LexisNexis Risk Solutions.