Redundancy selection criteria
In Long v British Gas Trading Ltd, an employment tribunal held that the selection for redundancy of a part-time employee who was the mother of young children was sex discrimination, less favourable treatment because of part-time working and an unfair dismissal.
In DLA Piper's latest case report, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) tackled the thorny issue of applying sickness absence criteria in redundancy selection to disabled employees at risk of redundancy.
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.
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.
Claire Thomas is managing associate, and Chris McAvoy, Joelle Parkinson, David Rintoul, and Gerri Hurst associates at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that the employer's decision to restrict a redundancy selection to one employee when there were other employees doing the same job who could have been put in a redundancy selection pool made her dismissal unfair.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that the employer was justified in deciding who would be chosen for voluntary redundancy on the basis of who would cost the least to make redundant, despite this criterion being indirectly discriminatory against a particular group of older workers.
Claire Benson is managing associate and Helen Corbett, Sinead Jones, Helen Ward and Tori O'Neil are associates at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
Joanne Magill, associate, and Claire Benson and Ceri Hughes, managing associates, at Addleshaw Goddard detail the latest rulings.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that the employment tribunal was wrong to find that the absence of a system of moderating two sets of redundancy scores following a TUPE transfer rendered the selection process unfair.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to redundancy selection criteria.
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.