Age discrimination in redundancy: 21-year worker awarded £11,400
A kitchen worker with 21 years' service was found to have been discriminated against on grounds of age when her employer failed to contact her about a redundancy. The tribunal awarded £11,400 including injury to feelings.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant worked for the respondent for 21 years as a kitchen/snack bar worker.
- She was dismissed on 26 January 2022 due to redundancy when the kitchen/snack bar closed.
- The respondent failed to pay her statutory redundancy payment, notice pay, and holiday pay.
- The tribunal found that the respondent discriminated against her on grounds of age by failing to contact her about the closure and not paying redundancy.
- The tribunal found that a fair procedure would have resulted in dismissal anyway, so no compensatory award was made for unfair dismissal.
Timeline
-
Claimant placed on furlough
The claimant was placed on furlough in March 2020 and did not return to work thereafter.
-
Employment terminated
The claimant's employment was terminated by reason of redundancy due to the closure of the kitchen/snack bar.
-
Hearing day 1
The tribunal heard evidence and submissions on 12 and 13 January 2023.
-
Hearing day 2
The tribunal concluded the hearing.
-
Judgment sent
Employment Judge Park sent the written judgment.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed by reason of redundancy, whether she was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment, notice pay, and holiday pay, and whether she was subjected to direct age discrimination.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claimant's claims for unfair dismissal, statutory redundancy payment, notice pay, holiday pay, and direct age discrimination.
Key reasons:
- The respondent failed to contact the claimant about the closure of the kitchen/snack bar, did not pay her redundancy or notice pay, and expected her not to make a fuss.
- However, the tribunal found that even if a fair procedure had been followed, the claimant would have been dismissed anyway (100% Polkey deduction), so no compensatory award for unfair dismissal was made.
Compensation breakdown:
- Notice pay: £1,603.80
- Statutory redundancy payment: £4,009.50
- Holiday pay: £400.95
- Injury to feelings (age discrimination): £5,000.00
- Interest: £385.75
- Total: £11,400.00
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must communicate directly with employees about redundancy decisions, regardless of their age or length of service.
- Failing to pay statutory redundancy, notice, and holiday pay can lead to additional claims for discrimination.
- A Polkey deduction can reduce compensation for unfair dismissal if the tribunal finds dismissal was inevitable even with a fair procedure.
- Long-serving employees are entitled to a fair process; ignoring them can be evidence of discrimination.
This case highlights how a long-serving employee can be left in the dark when an employer handles redundancy poorly. The claimant had worked for 21 years as a kitchen/snack bar worker before being placed on furlough in March 2020. She never returned to work, and in January 2022, her employment was terminated by reason of redundancy due to the closure of the kitchen. The respondent did not contact her about the closure, did not pay her statutory redundancy, notice, or holiday pay, and expected her not to make a fuss.
What the tribunal decided
The tribunal found that the respondent's failure to contact the claimant about the closure, and its failure to pay her redundancy and other payments, amounted to direct age discrimination. The claimant was 78 years old at the time. However, the tribunal also found that a fair procedure would have resulted in dismissal anyway, so no compensatory award was made for unfair dismissal. The claimant was awarded £11,400 in total, including £5,000 for injury to feelings.
What could have been done differently
The respondent could have avoided the discrimination claim by simply contacting the claimant to discuss the closure and her redundancy. Paying the statutory redundancy and other payments promptly would have prevented the claims for notice pay and holiday pay. The tribunal noted that the respondent's expectation that the claimant would not make a fuss was a factor in finding discrimination.
Why this matters
This case shows that even when a redundancy is genuine and dismissal is inevitable, employers must follow a fair process and communicate with employees. Ignoring an employee, especially one with long service, can lead to a finding of discrimination and additional compensation for injury to feelings. Employees in similar situations should be aware that they may have claims for unfair dismissal and discrimination if their employer fails to treat them fairly.
Similar cases
Beauty therapist made redundant while on maternity leave: partial win on payments
A beauty therapist with seven years' service was dismissed by redundancy while on maternity leave without consultation. The tribunal awarded her a statutory redundancy payment, notice pay, and holiday pay, but found the dismissal fair due to the salon's closure.
Café worker automatically unfairly dismissed for asserting right to written contract
A café worker with only six months' service was automatically unfairly dismissed after asking for a written contract. The tribunal awarded over £2,000 including injury to feelings for age discrimination.
Unfair dismissal but 100% Polkey reduction due to workplace closure
A former employee was unfairly dismissed but received only limited compensation because the tribunal found he would have been fairly dismissed a month later when the workplace closed. Total award: £12,419.29.
Site closure without process: redundancy dismissal ruled unfair
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.