Architectural assistant dismissed without consultation: procedural unfairness but no compensation
An architectural assistant with six years' service was made redundant without any prior consultation. The tribunal found the dismissal procedurally unfair but awarded no compensation because redundancy was inevitable.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #redundancy
- #procedural-unfairness
- #polkey-100-percent
- #furlough
- #holiday-pay
- #unqualified-architectural-assistant
Key facts
- Claimant was employed as an unqualified Architectural Assistant from 5 January 2015 to 22 October 2021.
- Claimant was furloughed from April 2020 with her consent and received 80% pay.
- Respondent recruited qualified Architectural Assistants during furlough.
- Claimant was dismissed by telephone on 27 September 2021 with no prior consultation.
- Respondent admitted procedural unfairness but argued redundancy was inevitable.
- Tribunal found 100% probability that claimant would have been dismissed in any event due to being the only unqualified assistant.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant commenced employment as an Architectural Assistant.
-
Furlough started
Claimant was placed on furlough with consent, receiving 80% pay.
-
Holiday request
Respondent asked claimant to agree to a week off in September.
-
Holiday pay without notice
Respondent paid 5 days annual leave to claimant without prior notice.
-
Redundancy decision documented
Respondent prepared a redundancy business case.
-
Dismissal telephone call
Respondent informed claimant her role was redundant.
-
Employment ended
Claimant's employment terminated after one month's notice.
-
Appeal lodged
Claimant appealed against redundancy.
-
Appeal meeting
Appeal meeting held.
-
Appeal outcome
Respondent upheld redundancy decision, admitting lack of consultation.
-
New employment
Claimant obtained permanent full-time employment.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed due to lack of consultation in a redundancy process, and whether compensation should be reduced because the dismissal was inevitable regardless of a fair procedure.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claim of unfair dismissal but awarded no compensation.
- The respondent admitted the dismissal was procedurally unfair as there was no consultation before the claimant was told her role was redundant.
- However, the tribunal found a 100% chance that the claimant would have been dismissed in any event, as she was the only unqualified architectural assistant and the business needed qualified staff.
- The basic award was nil by consent, and the compensatory award was nil after applying the Polkey principle.
- A separate claim for breach of the Working Time Regulations succeeded but no compensation was payable as the respondent had already paid the holiday pay owed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must consult with employees before making them redundant, even if the outcome seems inevitable.
- A Polkey reduction can reduce compensation to zero if the tribunal finds the employee would have been dismissed anyway under a fair procedure.
- Being the only employee in a particular role or skill level can make redundancy more likely, but does not remove the need for a fair process.
- Employees should check their holiday pay records, especially during furlough, to ensure leave is not taken without their consent.
- Representing yourself at tribunal is possible but having legal advice can help navigate complex issues like Polkey reductions.
A redundancy without warning
The claimant, an architectural assistant with six years' service, was placed on furlough in April 2020 during the pandemic. While she was on furlough, her employer, Cube Design Ltd, recruited qualified architectural assistants. In September 2021, she received a phone call telling her that her role was redundant. There had been no prior consultation, no warning, and no opportunity to discuss alternatives.
Procedural unfairness admitted
Cube Design Ltd accepted that the dismissal was procedurally unfair. The tribunal agreed: a fair redundancy process requires consultation, and the employer had failed to provide any. However, the company argued that the outcome would have been the same regardless, because the claimant was the only unqualified assistant and the business needed qualified staff.
The Polkey reduction
The tribunal applied the principle from the case Polkey v AE Dayton Services, which allows compensation to be reduced if a fair procedure would not have changed the outcome. Here, the tribunal found a 100% chance that the claimant would have been dismissed in any event. She was in a pool of one for her skill level, and the business case for redundancy was genuine. As a result, the compensatory award was reduced to nil.
What this case shows
This case illustrates that a procedural failure does not always lead to a compensation payout. Employers who skip consultation may still avoid a financial penalty if they can show the dismissal was inevitable. For employees, it highlights the importance of understanding that even a successful unfair dismissal claim can result in no compensation if the tribunal believes the outcome would have been the same. The claimant also succeeded in a claim for holiday pay, but the amount had already been paid, so no further award was made.
Similar cases
Pub manager dismissed during pandemic wins £18,000 for unpaid wages and holiday pay
A public house manager with 17 years' service was made redundant when the pub closed during COVID-19. The tribunal upheld the redundancy but awarded £17,936.55 for National Minimum Wage underpayments, notice pay, and holiday pay.
Waitress with 22 years' service loses unfair dismissal claim due to time limits
A waitress who worked for Lornar Ltd for 22 years had her unfair dismissal claim rejected because she missed the three-month time limit by several months.
Furlough return dispute: holiday pay awarded but constructive dismissal claim fails
A salesperson who refused to return to work after furlough ended was found to have resigned, not been dismissed. The tribunal awarded £2,263.82 for unpaid holiday pay.
Rushed redundancy during Covid: 16-year director unfairly dismissed after flawed consultation
A Regional Sales Director with 16 years' service was unfairly dismissed for redundancy after the employer rushed consultation and failed to consider alternatives. The tribunal awarded £34,295 but applied a 90% Polkey reduction.