Personal assistants made redundant after care needs changed: unfair dismissal claims fail

A change in care needs led to redundancy

This case shows how a genuine redundancy situation can arise even in a small, personal care setting. The employer, a disabled individual, had his care needs change after he graduated from university. He no longer needed the same number of carers working short shifts; instead, he needed fewer carers working longer live-in blocks. This was a genuine business reorganisation, even though the 'business' was the employer's own care.

The tribunal accepted that the employer had a reduced need for employees to carry out work of a particular kind. The claimants, who had worked as personal assistants for several years, were therefore redundant. Their unfair dismissal claims failed because the employer had a fair reason and followed a reasonable process, including consultation meetings and considering alternatives.

What could have been done differently

The employer could have avoided the notice pay claim by ensuring the claimants were paid their full contractual notice pay from the outset. Because the claimants were on furlough, they were paid 80% of their salary during the notice period. The tribunal held that the furlough scheme did not override the contractual entitlement to full pay during notice. This is a common pitfall for employers who furlough staff and then make them redundant.

Why this matters for similar claims

For employees in similar roles, this case reinforces that redundancy can be a fair dismissal if the employer's circumstances genuinely change. However, it also highlights that notice pay must be calculated correctly. Employees who are made redundant while on furlough should check they receive their full contractual notice pay, not just the furlough rate. The amounts involved may be small, but the principle is important.