Estimator dismissed after 5-day redundancy consultation: unfair dismissal
An estimator with 3 years' service was unfairly dismissed after his employer rushed through a redundancy consultation in just five working days. The tribunal found the process was too short and that alternative roles were not properly explored.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as an estimator from 20 February 2017 until dismissal on 30 September 2020.
- The respondent experienced a financial downturn due to the Covid-19 pandemic, leading to a redundancy decision.
- The claimant was placed on furlough in April and June 2020 due to a downturn in business.
- The redundancy consultation process lasted only 5 working days, from 17 August to 24 August 2020.
- The respondent did not actively explore alternative employment for the claimant, instead asking him to suggest options.
- The claimant's overtime claims were not paid because the work was not directed by the respondent as required by his contract.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Mark Edwards began employment as an estimator for Sowga Ltd.
-
First furlough letter
The respondent notified the claimant he would be placed on furlough due to a downturn in business caused by the coronavirus.
-
Disciplinary hearing invitation
The claimant was invited to a disciplinary hearing regarding a separate matter.
-
Second furlough letter
The claimant was placed on furlough again due to the downturn in business.
-
At risk of redundancy letter
The claimant was notified that his job was at risk of redundancy and invited to a consultation meeting.
-
First consultation meeting
The claimant attended a consultation meeting where the respondent explained the redundancy situation and asked for suggestions.
-
Second consultation and dismissal
The claimant attended a further consultation meeting and was immediately dismissed by reason of redundancy.
-
Effective date of termination
The claimant's employment ended with four weeks' pay in lieu of notice.
-
Claim presented
The claimant presented claims for unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction from wages.
-
Liability judgment
The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed but dismissed the overtime claim.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed by reason of redundancy and whether the respondent made unlawful deductions from wages for unpaid overtime.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed because the redundancy consultation process was too short (only 5 working days) and the employer did not actively explore alternative employment, instead asking the claimant to suggest options himself. The claim for unpaid overtime was dismissed because the overtime work was not directed by the employer as required by the contract.
Compensation is to be determined at a separate remedy hearing.
Lessons & takeaways
- A redundancy consultation must be meaningful and give the employee a genuine opportunity to discuss alternatives; a 5-day process is likely to be too short for most employees.
- Employers should actively search for alternative roles rather than simply asking the employee to suggest options.
- Overtime claims may fail if the contract requires the work to be directed by the employer and the employee worked voluntarily.
- Length of service matters: employees with longer service are entitled to more thorough consultation.
- Litigants in person should be aware that late evidence submitted by the other side may be excluded if it prejudices a fair hearing.
This case shows how a rushed redundancy process can cost an employer a finding of unfair dismissal. The claimant, an estimator with three years' service, was placed on furlough during the pandemic and then called to a redundancy consultation that lasted just five working days. The employer, Sowga Ltd, argued that the downturn in business justified a quick decision, but the tribunal found that the consultation was not meaningful.
What went wrong
The employer's main failures were timing and effort. The consultation started on 17 August 2020 and ended on 24 August 2020 with the claimant's dismissal. During that week, the claimant attended only two meetings. The employer did not actively look for alternative jobs for him; instead, it asked him to suggest options. The tribunal noted that a longer process might have allowed the claimant to find a suitable alternative role or to challenge the selection criteria.
Why the result matters
This decision reinforces that even during a pandemic, employers must follow a fair procedure. The tribunal also dismissed the claimant's overtime claim because his contract required overtime to be directed by the employer, and the work he did was voluntary. For employees considering similar claims, this case highlights the importance of checking contractual terms before pursuing a claim for unpaid wages.
The remedy hearing will determine compensation, which may be reduced if the tribunal finds that the claimant would have been dismissed anyway (the Polkey principle).
Similar cases
Unpaid wages and short notice: two employees win claims against Gold Mount Markets
Two former employees of Gold Mount Markets have won claims for unpaid wages, notice pay, and holiday pay after the company stopped paying them for over three months during the pandemic.
Unfair dismissal, unpaid furlough and holiday pay: a default judgment for an employee
A former employee of Hilltop Hotel (Carlisle) Ltd has won claims for unfair dismissal, unpaid holiday pay and unpaid furlough pay after the employer failed to defend the case. The tribunal awarded £4,580 in total.
Unfair dismissal and unpaid wages: former employee awarded £12,503
A former employee has been awarded £12,503 after an employment tribunal found she was unfairly dismissed, not given notice, and had wages unlawfully deducted by RR Swami Ltd.
Dismissed by text message after asking for a half day: unfair dismissal award of £4,778
A hairdresser with over two years' service was dismissed by text message after a dispute over taking a half day. The tribunal awarded £4,778 for unfair dismissal and unpaid wages.