Redundancy dismissal upheld after COVID revenue drop: a fair process
A Customer Services Officer with 5 years' service was fairly dismissed for redundancy after her employer's room hire revenue plummeted during the pandemic. The tribunal rejected claims of disability discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Customer Services Officer from 15 June 2015 until dismissal on 29 July 2020.
- The respondent's room hire revenue dropped from over £3,000 to £700 between March and September 2020 due to the COVID-19 lockdown.
- The respondent offered the claimant a trial period in an alternative role of Office Manager with modified objectives.
- The claimant did not fully meet the objectives of the trial role, leading to dismissal.
- The respondent's CEO, Ms Noelette Hanley, made the decision to dismiss based on redundancy, not because of the claimant's disability.
Timeline
-
Employment start
Claimant began employment as a Customer Services Officer.
-
First adjustment meeting
Meeting between claimant and CEO to discuss occupational health report and adjustments.
-
Adjustments agreed
Meeting where adjustments were accepted by both parties.
-
Lockdown begins
UK COVID-19 lockdown forced closure of respondent's premises.
-
Review meeting
Claimant told her position was at risk; consultation process began.
-
Dismissal
Claimant dismissed by reason of redundancy after unsuccessful trial in alternative role.
-
Preliminary hearing
Case management orders issued by Employment Judge Tobin.
-
Final hearing start
Substantive hearing held over three days.
-
Judgment given
Tribunal found dismissal fair and dismissed all claims.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's dismissal was by reason of redundancy and fair, and whether the respondent discriminated against her because of her disability or failed to make reasonable adjustments.
The outcome
The tribunal decided that the dismissal was fair and dismissed all claims.
Key reasons:
- The respondent's room hire revenue dropped significantly due to COVID-19 lockdown, creating a genuine redundancy situation.
- The respondent offered the claimant a trial period in an alternative role with modified objectives, which she did not fully meet.
- The decision to dismiss was based on redundancy, not disability. The respondent had made reasonable adjustments and consulted properly.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers facing financial difficulties due to external events like COVID-19 can rely on redundancy as a fair reason for dismissal if they follow a proper process.
- Offering a trial period in an alternative role with modified objectives can demonstrate that an employer has considered alternatives to redundancy.
- Disability discrimination claims may fail if the employer can show that the reason for dismissal was redundancy, not disability, and that reasonable adjustments were made.
- Employees should engage fully with consultation and trial periods, as failure to meet objectives can lead to fair dismissal.
A redundancy case shaped by the pandemic
This case illustrates how a genuine redundancy situation arising from the COVID-19 pandemic can justify a fair dismissal, even when the employee has a disability. The claimant, a Customer Services Officer with 5 years' service, was dismissed after her employer's room hire revenue dropped from over £3,000 to just £700 between March and September 2020. The charity, Luton Irish Forum, had to restructure due to the financial impact of lockdown.
What the employer did right
The tribunal noted that the respondent followed a fair process. They identified the claimant's role as at risk, consulted with her, and offered a trial period in an alternative role of Office Manager with modified objectives to accommodate her disability. When the claimant did not fully meet those objectives, the CEO made the decision to dismiss for redundancy. The tribunal found that the respondent had made reasonable adjustments and that the dismissal was not related to the claimant's disability.
Why the claims failed
The claimant argued that there was no genuine redundancy and that she was discriminated against because of her disability. However, the tribunal accepted that the revenue drop was real and that the respondent's decision was based on business need. The claimant also withdrew claims of detriment for public interest disclosure and victimisation. The tribunal concluded that the respondent acted reasonably in all the circumstances.
Key takeaway for similar cases
This case shows that employers can successfully defend redundancy dismissals if they can demonstrate a genuine business reason, a fair consultation process, and consideration of alternatives. For employees, it highlights the importance of engaging with trial periods and understanding that redundancy can be a fair reason for dismissal even when disability is a factor, provided the employer has made reasonable adjustments.
Similar cases
Translator with MS won reasonable adjustments claim but lost redundancy challenge
An English to German translator with multiple sclerosis won her claim that her employer failed to make reasonable adjustments during redundancy consultation, but the tribunal upheld the redundancy dismissal as fair.
Redundancy selection after a workplace injury: when a fair process can still lead to dismissal
A Food and Beverage Assistant who fractured his hip at work and was later made redundant during the pandemic has lost his unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims. The tribunal found the redundancy process was fair and that his disability was not the reason for his selection.
20-year manager dismissed for capability after employer refused to adjust role for disability
A Global Governance Risk and Compliance Manager with 20 years' service was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against after GlaxoSmithKline failed to make reasonable adjustments for her hand disability. The tribunal awarded £24,785 for injury to feelings.
Head butler dismissed by redundancy after Brexit and COVID: claim fails
A head butler with six years' service lost his unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims after a tribunal found his redundancy was genuine and fairly handled.