Redundancy dismissal upheld: misunderstanding over alternative roles did not make process unfair
A Community Support Service Manager who believed she had been offered alternative roles was fairly dismissed for redundancy after a small charity's consultation process was found to be reasonable. The Exeter tribunal dismissed her claim.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The respondent charity faced severe financial difficulties due to the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to a redundancy situation.
- The claimant was the only employee in the Community Support Service Manager role, which was deleted as the @Home service was wound down.
- The claimant was placed at risk of redundancy in January 2021 and consulted over several months.
- The claimant mistakenly believed she had been offered and accepted alternative roles, but no binding offers were made.
- The claimant declined to attend a competency-based interview for the new Charity Manager role.
- The respondent corrected its earlier failure to place another employee at risk and resumed consultation in June 2021.
Timeline
-
Claimant placed at risk of redundancy
The claimant was formally notified that her role was at risk and consultation began.
-
First consultation meeting
The claimant met with the CEO to discuss potential alternative roles, including a Service Manager role.
-
Meeting about Operations Manager role
The claimant believed she was offered the Operations Manager role, but the tribunal found no binding offer was made.
-
Email exchange with trustee
Shaun Cooper emailed the claimant stating no formal offer had been made; the claimant responded by accepting redundancy.
-
Claimant raised grievance
The claimant formally complained about the redundancy process, including the failure to place another employee at risk.
-
Consultation resumed with new Charity Manager role
The respondent informed the claimant of a revised structure with a single Charity Manager role and invited her to consultation.
-
Second consultation meeting on Charity Manager role
The claimant expressed interest in the Charity Manager role and was invited to a competency-based interview.
-
Claimant declined interview
The claimant refused the interview, alleging bias and unfairness.
-
Dismissal for redundancy
The claimant was dismissed by letter, with the respondent citing redundancy as the reason.
-
Appeal hearing
The claimant's appeal against dismissal was heard by an external HR consultant.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's dismissal was for a potentially fair reason (redundancy) and, if so, whether the employer acted reasonably in all the circumstances, including consultation, selection, and consideration of alternative employment.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim for unfair dismissal. It found that the respondent had a genuine redundancy situation due to the financial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and that the claimant's role was genuinely redundant. The consultation process was adequate, and the respondent properly considered alternative employment. The claimant's mistaken belief that she had been offered alternative roles did not make the process unfair. No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Small charities facing financial difficulties can rely on redundancy as a fair reason for dismissal, provided they conduct a genuine consultation process.
- Employees should clarify in writing whether an offer of alternative employment has been made; a discussion about a potential role is not the same as a binding offer.
- Declining to attend a competency-based interview for a suitable alternative role may be seen as a failure to engage in the process, which can support a fair dismissal.
- Employers should ensure that all employees in similar roles are placed at risk of redundancy; correcting an initial oversight can strengthen the fairness of the process.
When a redundancy process goes wrong in the employee's mind, but not in law
This case shows how a genuine redundancy situation, combined with a reasonable consultation process, can lead to a fair dismissal even when the employee feels misled. The claimant, a Community Support Service Manager with four years' service, was made redundant after Exeter Leukemia Fund faced severe financial difficulties due to the pandemic. The charity had to restructure, deleting her role as part of winding down the @Home service.
The claimant believed she had been offered alternative roles, such as Operations Manager, but the tribunal found that no binding offer was made. When a new Charity Manager role was created, she declined to attend a competency-based interview, alleging bias and unfairness. The tribunal noted that the respondent had corrected an earlier failure to place another employee at risk, resuming consultation in June 2021, which demonstrated a willingness to follow proper process.
What the employer could have done differently
While the tribunal upheld the dismissal, the case highlights the importance of clear communication. The respondent could have avoided the claimant's misunderstanding by confirming in writing that no formal offer had been made after the February 2021 meeting. However, the tribunal accepted that the charity, as a small employer with limited resources, had acted reasonably overall.
Why this matters for similar claims
For employees, this case is a reminder that a redundancy process can be fair even if it feels rushed or confusing. The key is whether the employer genuinely consulted, considered alternatives, and acted within the range of reasonable responses. For small employers, it shows that a thorough, documented process can withstand scrutiny, even when mistakes are made and corrected along the way.
Similar cases
Redundancy with no consultation: a small employer's costly mistake
A graphic designer was told her role was redundant in a five-minute meeting with no warning, no consultation and no consideration of alternatives. The tribunal awarded £14,200.
Long-serving clerk made redundant after restructure: dismissal upheld
A charity's decision to delete a clerk and receiver role and replace it with a general manager post was fair, the tribunal ruled, rejecting claims of unfair dismissal and unpaid holiday pay.
Kitchen manager dismissed without consultation in redundancy: unfair dismissal
A kitchen manager with two years' service was unfairly dismissed when her employer made her redundant without any consultation or warning. The tribunal awarded £4,809.49 in compensation.
Business Development Manager dismissed after raising grievance: redundancy or retaliation?
A tribunal found that a Business Development Manager was unfairly dismissed because the real reason was his grievance, not redundancy. The case highlights the risks of dismissing a worker who has raised concerns.