CHRO unfairly dismissed after sex-biased appraisal and reorganisation
A Chief Human Resources Officer was unfairly dismissed by Co-operative Group Limited after a sex-biased performance appraisal and a flawed reorganisation. The tribunal awarded £101,373 in compensation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #sex-discrimination
- #appraisal-grading
- #aip-bonus
- #injury-to-feelings
- #polkey-reduction
- #acas-code-uplift
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as Chief Human Resources Officer from 25 March 2013 until 4 April 2017.
- The tribunal found that the claimant was directly discriminated against on grounds of sex in the 2015 performance appraisal, which was graded 'partially achieved' without an adequate meeting.
- The claimant's unfair dismissal claim succeeded on procedural grounds, but the tribunal found the dismissal was for a substantial reason (reorganisation) and not discriminatory.
- The claimant's equal pay claim was initially successful but overturned on appeal.
- The remedy hearing awarded £46,750 for loss of AIP bonus (55% chance of higher rating) and £8,600 for injury to feelings.
- The compensatory award for unfair dismissal was limited to one month's pay (£22,169) due to a Polkey reduction.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant appointed Director – Group HR Strategic Projects at £190,000 salary.
-
Promotion to CHRO
Claimant invited to step up to Group Chief HR Officer at £500,000 base salary, later adjusted to £425,000.
-
First alleged protected disclosure
Claimant handed CEO Richard Pennycook an article about Chief People Officer, raising concerns about equal pay.
-
Second alleged protected disclosure
Phone call from Austria where claimant discussed pay parity and flexible working proposal.
-
Third alleged protected disclosure
Claimant discussed Guardian article on gender pay gap and Hay grading results with CEO.
-
Performance review meeting
Short meeting with CEO; claimant's self-assessment noted issues with projects.
-
Performance rating decided
CEO emailed Chairman with 'partially achieved' rating for claimant; other executives rated higher.
-
Sick leave started
Claimant went on sick leave after phone call about performance rating not being changed.
-
Notice of termination
Claimant given 12 months' notice; offered alternative role but declined.
-
Employment ended
Notice period expired; no agreement on new role reached.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed, whether she was discriminated against on grounds of sex in her performance appraisal, and whether she was entitled to equal pay with male comparators.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claimant's unfair dismissal claim on procedural grounds, finding that the dismissal was for a substantial reason (reorganisation) but that the process was flawed. It also found that the claimant was directly discriminated against on grounds of sex in her 2015 performance appraisal, which was graded 'partially achieved' without an adequate meeting. The equal pay claim was initially successful but overturned on appeal.
Compensation awarded:
- Basic award: £2,934
- Compensatory award (limited to one month's pay due to Polkey reduction): £22,169
- Injury to feelings: £8,600
- Loss of AIP bonus (55% chance of higher rating): £46,750
- Total: £101,373.22
Lessons & takeaways
- Performance appraisals must be conducted fairly and with adequate meetings; a summary rating without discussion can amount to discrimination.
- Employers should ensure that reorganisations are carried out with a fair procedure, even if the reason for dismissal is potentially fair.
- Sex discrimination claims can succeed even if the dismissal itself is not discriminatory, if the appraisal process leading to it is biased.
- Compensation for unfair dismissal may be limited if the tribunal finds that a fair procedure would not have changed the outcome (Polkey reduction).
- ACAS Code compliance is important; failure to follow it can lead to an uplift in compensation.
What this case shows in practice
This case highlights how a flawed performance appraisal can lead to a successful sex discrimination claim, even when the dismissal itself is for a non-discriminatory reason. The claimant, a senior executive, was given a 'partially achieved' rating without a proper year-end meeting, while male colleagues received higher ratings. The tribunal found that this treatment was directly discriminatory on grounds of sex.
What the employer could have done differently
Co-operative Group Limited could have avoided the discrimination finding by ensuring that the claimant's appraisal included a proper discussion and opportunity to respond. A fairer process might have also reduced the procedural unfairness in the dismissal. The employer's failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures led to an uplift in compensation.
Why the result matters
This case demonstrates that even high-level employees can succeed in discrimination claims when basic procedural fairness is ignored. It also shows that tribunals will scrutinise performance ratings for bias, and that a reorganisation does not automatically justify a dismissal if the process is flawed. The substantial compensation reflects the impact on the claimant's career and feelings.
Similar cases
Dismissed without notice and discriminated against: a double blow for a former employee
A former employee was unfairly dismissed, wrongfully dismissed without notice, and discriminated against on grounds of sex. The tribunal awarded £16,208.68, including an uplift for the employer's failure to follow the ACAS code.
Parking warden with dyslexia unfairly dismissed over GPS data: tribunal finds discrimination
A civil enforcement officer with severe dyslexia was unfairly dismissed after GPS data appeared to contradict his patrol records. The tribunal found procedural failings and indirect disability discrimination, awarding £17,126.
Whistleblower dismissed in flawed redundancy process: ACAS uplift adds 25% to compensation
A former employee was unfairly dismissed after making a protected disclosure about health and safety. The tribunal awarded over £50,000, including a 25% uplift for the employer's failure to follow the ACAS Code of Conduct.
Pregnant employee dismissed without risk assessment: discrimination and unfair dismissal
A tribunal found that VPS PVT Limited unfairly dismissed a pregnant employee and discriminated against her by failing to carry out a health and safety risk assessment. The claimant was awarded £23,823.50 in compensation.