Unfairly dismissed workshop technician awarded £1,350 after Polkey deduction
A workshop technician unfairly made redundant was awarded £1,350 compensation after the tribunal applied a 50% Polkey deduction for the chance he would have been dismissed in a fair process.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Key facts
- The claimant was unfairly dismissed by reason of redundancy.
- The redundancy payment had already been made, so no basic award was due.
- The parties agreed that the respondent owed £192.29 for unauthorised deductions.
- The claimant was not fit to work from 28 August 2020 due to medical conditions.
- The tribunal found a 50% chance the claimant would have been selected in a fair process.
- The claimant's losses were limited to 6 weeks from 15 July to 28 August 2020.
Timeline
-
Effective date of termination
The claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy.
-
End of statutory notice period
The claimant's two-week statutory notice ended.
-
Job application to Fenland District Council
The claimant applied for a Workshop Technician role and was interviewed but not offered the job.
-
Claimant became unfit for work
Medical records show the claimant was not fit to work due to shoulder and other health issues.
-
Liability hearing
The tribunal found the claimant had been unfairly dismissed by reason of redundancy.
-
Remedy hearing
The tribunal heard evidence on remedy and determined the compensatory award.
-
Judgment on remedy
Employment Judge Laidler issued the remedy judgment.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide the amount of compensation for unfair dismissal, including whether the claimant had mitigated his loss and what Polkey deduction to apply for the chance he would have been dismissed in a fair process.
The outcome
The tribunal awarded a compensatory award of £1,350, reflecting 6 weeks' loss of earnings from 15 July to 28 August 2020 at £450 per week, reduced by 50% for the chance the claimant would have been dismissed in a fair process.
- Compensatory award: £1,350 (after 50% Polkey deduction)
- Unauthorised deductions: £192.29 (agreed)
- No basic award as a statutory redundancy payment had already been made.
Lessons & takeaways
- Keep a record of all job applications and searches to demonstrate you have taken reasonable steps to find alternative work after dismissal.
- A Polkey deduction can significantly reduce compensation if the tribunal finds there was a chance you would have been fairly dismissed anyway.
- Even if you have health issues or caring responsibilities, you should still make reasonable efforts to look for work online or apply for suitable roles.
- If you are dismissed for redundancy, check whether you have received all payments you are entitled to, including any unauthorised deductions.
A rushed redundancy process leads to compensation, but mitigation matters
This case shows how tribunals balance an employer's unfair process with the employee's duty to mitigate their losses. The workshop technician was made redundant in a rushed process where the outcome was arguably predetermined. The tribunal found the dismissal unfair, but the compensation was limited because the claimant had not done enough to find new work and because there was a 50% chance he would have been selected anyway in a fair process.
What could have been done differently?
The employer could have conducted a fairer redundancy process, giving the claimant a proper opportunity to prepare for interview and compete on equal terms. For the claimant, keeping a detailed log of job applications and searches would have strengthened his case on mitigation. The tribunal noted he only applied for two jobs and did not sign up with agencies, despite being able to search online while shielding.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case highlights that even when a dismissal is unfair, compensation can be heavily reduced if the employee does not take reasonable steps to find alternative work, or if the tribunal thinks they would have been dismissed anyway. The Polkey deduction here was 50%, reflecting the equal chance of selection. It also shows that unauthorised deductions claims can succeed alongside unfair dismissal, but the amounts may be small.
Similar cases
Unfair redundancy dismissal: 75% Polkey reduction for asbestos supervisor
An asbestos supervisor unfairly dismissed for redundancy was awarded £3,298 after a 75% Polkey reduction. The tribunal found the dismissal unfair but applied a large reduction for the chance of fair dismissal.
Project Manager unfairly dismissed for redundancy without consultation: small company lessons
A project manager was unfairly dismissed when his small employer made him redundant without any warning, consultation or appeal. The tribunal awarded £2,650.83 after applying a 70% Polkey reduction.
Dismissed without a disciplinary hearing: procedural unfairness costs employer £9,500
A former employee with two years' service was unfairly dismissed after being suspended and then sacked without any disciplinary hearing. The Cambridge tribunal awarded £9,546.81 in compensation.
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.