Research Fellow dismissed without proper redundancy consultation: University of Warwick found unfair
A Research Fellow at the University of Warwick was unfairly dismissed when the university failed to follow its own fixed-term contract policy and did not carry out a proper redundancy consultation before her contract ended. The tribunal awarded £833.04 in compensation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Research Fellow on a fixed-term contract from 1 November 2016 to 30 September 2020.
- The respondent sent the claimant an FT3 redundancy letter on 1 September 2020 without prior consultation.
- The claimant was never sent the required FT1 consultation letter.
- A consultation meeting held on 10 September 2020 was not a proper consultation meeting.
- The tribunal found a 65% chance that the claimant's employment would have been extended by two weeks had a fair procedure been followed.
- The claimant succeeded in her claim for unlawful deduction of wages for holiday pay.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began as Research Assistant on a fixed-term contract until 31 October 2019.
-
Promoted to Research Fellow
Claimant promoted to Research Fellow, grade 6.
-
First extension
Contract extended from 1 November 2019 to 30 April 2020.
-
Second extension
Contract extended from 1 May 2020 to 30 September 2020.
-
Claimant emailed about building access
Claimant emailed Paula Matthews about building access, prompting HR to process her as a leaver.
-
FT3 letter sent
Claimant received FT3 redundancy letter dated 28 August 2020, stating consultation had occurred, which it had not.
-
Redeployment link sent
Justine Pearson sent claimant a link to the redeployment policy.
-
Second FT3 letter sent
A modified FT3 letter was sent; claimant was not sent an FT1 letter.
-
Meeting with Professor Forster
Meeting held, but tribunal found it was not a proper consultation meeting.
-
Employment ended
Claimant's fixed-term contract expired.
-
Appeal hearing
Appeal heard by Professor Meyer and Professor Ward; appeal dismissed.
-
Appeal outcome sent
Claimant received appeal outcome letter dated 9 October 2020.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal of a fixed-term employee by reason of redundancy was fair when the employer failed to follow its own fixed-term contract policy, which required a consultation letter (FT1) before a redundancy letter (FT3), and whether the subsequent meeting amounted to a proper consultation.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claim of unfair dismissal, finding that the University of Warwick had not followed its own fixed-term contract policy. The claimant was sent an FT3 redundancy letter on 1 September 2020 without any prior FT1 consultation letter, and the meeting held on 10 September was not a proper consultation.
However, the tribunal applied a Polkey reduction of 65%, concluding that even with a fair procedure, there was only a 65% chance the claimant's employment would have been extended by two weeks. The compensatory award was therefore reduced accordingly.
Compensation breakdown:
- Basic award: £0 (no loss of statutory rights as employment ended by expiry of fixed term)
- Compensatory award: £833.04 (after 65% Polkey reduction)
- No contributory fault deduction
Lessons & takeaways
- Fixed-term employees have the same right to a fair redundancy process as permanent staff — employers must follow their own policies.
- Sending a redundancy letter before any consultation is a clear procedural failure that can make a dismissal unfair.
- Even if a dismissal is unfair, compensation can be reduced if the tribunal finds the employee would have been dismissed anyway after a fair process (Polkey reduction).
- Employees should check their employer's policies on fixed-term contracts and redundancy — a failure to follow them can be a key part of an unfair dismissal claim.
This case shows how a failure to follow internal procedures can turn a straightforward fixed-term contract non-renewal into an unfair dismissal claim. The claimant, a Research Fellow with nearly four years' service, was sent a redundancy letter without any prior consultation, contrary to the university's own fixed-term contract policy. The meeting that followed was not a genuine consultation — it was too late and lacked meaningful discussion about alternatives.
What the university did wrong
The University of Warwick sent an FT3 redundancy letter on 1 September 2020, stating that consultation had already taken place, when it had not. The required FT1 consultation letter was never sent. The subsequent meeting on 10 September was not a proper consultation; it was a fait accompli. The tribunal found that the university had breached its own policy, which was designed to ensure fair treatment for fixed-term employees.
Why the compensation was limited
Despite finding the dismissal unfair, the tribunal applied a Polkey reduction of 65%. This means they concluded that even with a fair process, there was only a 65% chance the claimant's employment would have been extended by two weeks. The compensatory award was therefore reduced to £833.04. This highlights that even when an employer gets the process wrong, compensation may be limited if the outcome would have been similar.
What this means for similar claims
For employees on fixed-term contracts, this case reinforces that their employer must follow its own policies and provide genuine consultation before a redundancy dismissal. For employers, it is a reminder that cutting corners on process — especially by sending a redundancy letter before any consultation — is likely to render a dismissal unfair, even if the substantive reason for dismissal is valid.
Similar cases
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.
Fixed-term expiry and relationship breakdown: dismissal upheld as some other substantial reason
An employment tribunal has dismissed all claims brought by a support worker against the University of the West of England, finding that his dismissal following the expiry of a fixed-term contract and an irretrievable breakdown in the working relationship was fair.
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.
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.