Redundancy
Redundancy is one of the five potentially fair reasons for dismissal under section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. But "potentially fair" doesn't mean fair in practice — most redundancy claims that reach the tribunal turn on procedure (consultation, selection, alternative employment) rather than whether the redundancy itself was real.
Cases on file
331
Claimant win rate
65%
Cases reaching a determination
Median damages awarded
£9,378
Where compensation was awarded
How claims actually progress
Many unfair dismissal claims never reach a hearing on the merits — they're struck out, out of time, or fall outside the tribunal's jurisdiction. This is independent of why the dismissal happened.
270
82% of allTribunal decided whether the dismissal was fair.
21
6% of allClaim ended early — usually for non-attendance, non-compliance, or no reasonable prospect.
23
7% of allClaim filed after the 3-month limit and not extended.
16
5% of allClaimant lacked two years’ service, the right employment status, or the tribunal had no power to hear it.
1
0% of allClaim resolved without a hearing.
The fair-process pillars
Most successful redundancy claims hit at least one of these:
- No genuine redundancy situation — the role was actually being filled by someone else, or the "redundancy" was a cover for a performance dismissal.
- No or inadequate consultation — pre-decided outcomes, single-meeting "consultations," failure to give time to respond.
- Unfair pool or selection criteria — picking a pool of one when there were comparable employees, using subjective criteria like "attitude" without objective measures.
- Unfair scoring — applying the criteria inconsistently, not letting the employee see or challenge their scores.
- Failure to consider suitable alternative employment — not telling the employee about vacancies, or rejecting them before they could apply.
Collective consultation and protective awards
When 20+ redundancies are proposed within a 90-day window:
- 30 days minimum consultation for 20–99 redundancies
- 45 days for 100 or more
- Information requirements under section 188 TULRCA: reasons, numbers, selection method, etc.
Failure exposes the employer to a protective award under section 189 — up to 90 days' actual pay per affected employee. This is the largest single liability in UK employment law for procedural failures. Insolvency doesn't avoid it: the Secretary of State pays, then is subrogated to the workers' claims against the employer.
Statutory vs contractual redundancy
The statutory minimum is set out in s.135 and Schedule 14 ERA. Many employers offer contractual enhanced redundancy on top — common in unionised workplaces, the public sector, and large employers. Enhancements can be cash multiples (e.g. 2× statutory), additional weeks per year, or higher pay caps.
The four-week trial period
Section 138 ERA allows an employee who accepts an offer of alternative employment to try it for four weeks (extendable for retraining) without losing the right to claim a redundancy payment. If at the end of the trial either side considers it unsuitable, the original redundancy stands.
Why these cases matter
Redundancy makes up a substantial share of unfair dismissal claims — and the unique remedy of the protective award means collective consultation failures can drive eight-figure exposures even where no individual claimant has a strong substantive complaint.
Cases on Redundancy
Showing the 20 most recent of 331 cases
Senior Financial Planning and Reporting Manager (8 years' service) v North West London Integrated Care Board
A senior manager's unfair dismissal claim was struck out after he failed to disclose documents about his new job. The tribunal ordered him to pay £6,853 in costs for unreasonable conduct.
Dismissed · Mar 2024Dismissed—Mar 2024Delivery driver (2.5 years' service) v NHK Enfield Ltd
A delivery driver was unfairly dismissed after his manager told him 'I don't need you any more' and used abusive language. The Watford tribunal awarded £4,656 in compensation.
Partial · £4,656 · Mar 2024Partial£4,656Mar 2024Control Room Team Leader (11 years' service) v MTR Corporation (Crossrail) Limited t/a MTR Elizabeth Line
A tribunal found that MTR Elizabeth Line unfairly dismissed a control room team leader of 11 years over a hug and alleged anti-Semitic comments, but reduced compensation by 75% due to his own conduct.
Partial · £23,361 · Jan 2024Partial£23,361Jan 2024EFL Teacher (18 years' service) v Golders Green College & School of English Ltd
An EFL teacher with 18 years' service was constructively dismissed after her employer unilaterally imposed a zero-hours contract and refused union representation. The tribunal awarded £39,208.47.
Won · £39,208 · Dec 2023Won£39,208Dec 2023Graduate trainee accountant (11 years' service) v PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
A graduate trainee accountant who resigned after being invited to a disciplinary meeting for unauthorised absence failed to prove constructive unfair dismissal. The tribunal found the employer's conduct did not breach trust and confidence.
Lost · Dec 2023Lost—Dec 2023Former employee (3 years' service) v Advanced Plant Hire Ltd
A former employee with three years' service was unfairly dismissed after his site closed and the employer failed to follow any redundancy process. The tribunal awarded over £44,000 in compensation.
Won · £44,297 · Dec 2023Won£44,297Dec 2023Kitchen/Production Manager (2 years' service) v Jam’n’vegan
A kitchen manager with two years' service was unfairly dismissed when her employer made her redundant without any consultation or warning. The tribunal awarded £4,809.49 in compensation.
Won · £4,809 · Dec 2023Won£4,809Dec 2023Former employees v Ideal Shopping Direct Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) and Ideal World Ltd
Two employees were unfairly dismissed and awarded £25,000 in damages after their employer failed to transfer them under TUPE regulations. The tribunal also made a protective award of 90 days' pay for failure to consult.
Won · £25,000 · Dec 2023Won£25,000Dec 2023Global Governance Risk and Compliance Manager (20 years' service) v GlaxoSmithKline Services Unlimited
A Global Governance Risk and Compliance Manager with 20 years' service was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against after GlaxoSmithKline failed to make reasonable adjustments for her hand disability. The tribunal awarded £24,785 for injury to feelings.
Partial · £24,785 · Dec 2023Partial£24,785Dec 2023University academic (teacher and researcher in Medieval and Early Modern English Literature) v University of Leicester
A University of Leicester academic was unfairly dismissed when the university failed to properly consult on redundancy selection after changing its proposal to retain a permanent post. The tribunal awarded £72,487.50 in compensation.
Partial · £72,488 · Dec 2023Partial£72,488Dec 2023Former employee v Garbett Butchers Ltd
A former butcher won £11,871 after his employer failed to pay notice, holiday pay, or a redundancy payment and did not attend the tribunal hearing.
Won · £11,871 · Dec 2023Won£11,871Dec 2023Assistant Playground Leader and SENCO (26 years' service) v Crossways Playgroup (an unincorporated association)
A tribunal refused a committee member's application to file a late response in a redundancy claim brought by an assistant playground leader with 26 years' service. The case will now proceed to a remedy hearing.
Partial · Dec 2023Partial—Dec 2023Head of Trade and Data (over 5 years' service) and Head of Finance (over 7 years' service) v Hallett Retain Services Ltd (in voluntary liquidation)
Two former employees who brought claims for unfair dismissal, discrimination and redundancy had their cases thrown out after failing to attend the final hearing or provide any evidence.
Dismissed · Dec 2023Dismissed—Dec 2023Electrical engineer (probationary employee, less than 3 months' service) v Integral UK Ltd
An electrical engineer dismissed during his probationary period for poor performance and a safety incident failed to prove race, age or disability discrimination. The tribunal upheld the employer's decision.
Lost · Nov 2023Lost—Nov 2023Former employee v Mold Systems EU Limited (In Administration)
A former employee won a protective award of 90 days' pay after his employer made him redundant without any consultation. The company was in administration and did not attend the hearing.
Partial · Nov 2023Partial—Nov 2023Former People Advisor (2 years' service) v London Borough of Hounslow
A former People Advisor who resigned after her employer failed to respond to her redundancy request for 39 days has been allowed to pursue claims for a redundancy payment and constructive unfair dismissal.
Lost · Nov 2023Lost—Nov 2023Data Partnerships Manager (2 years' service) v Appscatter Limited (in creditors' liquidation)
A Data Partnerships Manager was dismissed without notice on the day his employer announced a TUPE transfer. The tribunal awarded £11,670 for breach of contract and £7,423 for failure to inform and consult.
Won · £11,670 · Nov 2023Won£11,670Nov 2023Former employee (annual salary £75,000 plus car allowance) v Synpower Merchant Services Limited
A former employee has been awarded £10,125.26 after his employer made an unauthorised deduction from his wages, failed to pay accrued holiday pay, and withheld statutory redundancy pay.
Won · £10,125 · Nov 2023Won£10,125Nov 2023Former employees (telemarketing business) v Phonetic Group Limited
Former telemarketing employees lose protective award and unfair dismissal claims after a TUPE transfer from a company in creditors' voluntary liquidation, but win compensation for failure to consult.
Partial · Nov 2023Partial—Nov 2023Cleaner (7 years' service) v Michael Cottington and Irene Cundliffe sued as Committee Members of the Golborne Bowling Club
A cleaner was unfairly dismissed when a bowling club committee decided to let her go without notice or any redundancy procedure. The tribunal awarded £7,252 in compensation, including an ACAS uplift for failing to follow the statutory code.
Won · £7,252 · Nov 2023Won£7,252Nov 2023
Use the filters above to drill into specific outcomes, damages ranges, or years.
Frequently asked
- What legally counts as redundancy?
- Section 139 ERA defines redundancy as the closure of the business, the closure of the workplace, or a reduced need for employees doing work of a particular kind. The reduction doesn't have to be permanent and doesn't have to be company-wide.
- What's the statutory redundancy payment?
- Half a week's pay for each full year aged 18–21, one week's pay for each full year aged 22–40, and 1.5 weeks' pay for each full year aged 41+. Capped at 20 years' service and a statutory weekly limit (£700/week from April 2024 — so the maximum statutory payment is currently £21,000). You need at least two years' continuous service.
- When does collective consultation kick in?
- When 20 or more redundancies are proposed at one establishment within 90 days, the employer must consult collectively under section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. Minimum consultation periods are 30 days (20–99 redundancies) or 45 days (100+). Failure can trigger a "protective award" of up to 90 days' pay per affected employee.
- What's a fair redundancy selection process?
- A fair pool, transparent and objective selection criteria, scoring applied consistently, a chance for the employee to challenge their scores, and meaningful consideration of suitable alternative employment. The leading case is Williams v Compair Maxam (1982), still cited 40 years on.
- What is "suitable alternative employment"?
- An offer of another role within the organisation that's broadly comparable in pay, status, and skills. Employees offered SAE who unreasonably refuse can lose their statutory redundancy payment. There's also a four-week trial period to try an alternative role without losing redundancy rights.
