Farm shop worker dismissed after changing her mind about alternative role: unfair dismissal

A change of heart that came too late

This case highlights the importance of employers keeping an open mind when an employee has second thoughts about a redundancy alternative. The claimant, a farm shop worker with seven years' service, was offered a role at another shop when her branch closed. She initially refused due to anxiety about driving to an unfamiliar location, but later changed her mind and asked for a trial period. Her employer, M.B. Farm Produce Limited, did not respond and confirmed her dismissal.

The tribunal found that while the alternative role was suitable and the claimant's initial refusal was unreasonable, the employer's failure to consider her change of heart made the dismissal unfair. The employer could have avoided this outcome by simply allowing the trial period as originally offered.

What the employer could have done differently

The employer had already offered a trial period in its initial letter. When the claimant later expressed willingness to try the role, the employer should have responded positively. Instead, it ignored her letter and proceeded with the redundancy. The tribunal noted that a reasonable employer would have at least discussed the change of heart and allowed the trial.

Why this matters for similar claims

This case shows that the duty to consider alternative employment does not end when an employee initially says no. If an employee later changes their mind, employers should engage with that change. It also demonstrates that even where an employee's refusal was unreasonable, the employer's subsequent actions can still render the dismissal unfair.

The claimant's statutory redundancy payment claim failed because her initial refusal was unreasonable, but she still received compensation for unfair dismissal, reduced by 50% to reflect the chance she would have been dismissed anyway.