Redundancy dismissal for research nurse: pool of one and Polkey reduction
A respiratory research nurse was unfairly dismissed when her fixed-term contract was not renewed due to financial deficits. The tribunal awarded £11,754 after finding a 50% chance she would have been dismissed anyway.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #redundancy
- #unfair-dismissal
- #polkey-reduction
- #enhanced-redundancy-payment
- #fixed-term-contract
- #pool-of-one
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Band 6 Respiratory Research Nurse on fixed-term contracts from 25 July 2016 to 10 April 2020.
- Professor Saralaya decided not to renew the claimant's contract due to financial deficits in the respiratory research unit.
- The claimant was the only Band 6 nurse whose contract was due for renewal at the time of the redundancy decision.
- The claimant was off sick from 30 May 2019 and never returned to work before her dismissal.
- The Employment Appeal Tribunal substituted a finding of unfair dismissal and remitted the case for remedy.
- The Tribunal found a 50% chance that the claimant would have been dismissed had a fair procedure been followed.
Timeline
-
Claimant started employment
Claimant appointed as Band 6 Respiratory Research Nurse on a fixed-term contract.
-
Redundancy decision
Professor Saralaya decided to reduce headcount by one, not renewing the claimant's contract due to financial deficits.
-
Claimant went off sick
Claimant signed off work due to work-related stress and never returned.
-
Meeting with Professor Saralaya
Meeting held to explain redundancy rationale; claimant's contract extended to 1 September 2019.
-
Substantive contract ended
Claimant's contract as Respiratory Research Nurse ended; offered alternative Band 5 post on Ward 23.
-
Deadline for decision on alternative employment
Claimant given deadline to accept Band 5 post; she refused on 9 April.
-
Employment terminated
Claimant taken off payroll after refusing alternative employment.
-
First liability hearing
Tribunal found redundancy dismissal but dismissed all other claims; ordered contractual redundancy payment.
-
Remedy hearing
Tribunal awarded compensatory award of £11,754.05 after 50% Polkey reduction.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide the appropriate compensatory award for unfair dismissal, including whether to apply a Polkey reduction for the chance the claimant would have been dismissed anyway, and how to treat the enhanced redundancy payment.
The outcome
The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed due to procedural flaws in the redundancy process. However, it applied a 50% Polkey reduction, concluding there was a significant chance she would have been dismissed even with a fair procedure.
Compensation breakdown:
- Compensatory award: £11,754.05 (after 50% Polkey reduction)
- No basic award (contractual redundancy payment of £19,045.88 was ordered separately at the liability hearing)
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers should ensure a fair selection process even when the redundancy pool is just one person, including meaningful consultation and consideration of alternatives.
- Fixed-term contract employees can still claim unfair dismissal if the non-renewal is due to redundancy and the procedure is flawed.
- A Polkey reduction can significantly reduce compensation if the tribunal finds the employee would likely have been dismissed anyway with a fair process.
- Enhanced redundancy payments under a contractual scheme are separate from statutory awards and must be claimed specifically.
A redundancy that went wrong
A respiratory research nurse with nearly four years' service at Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust was dismissed when her fixed-term contract was not renewed due to financial deficits in the respiratory research unit. The Trust decided to reduce headcount by one, and the nurse was the only Band 6 nurse whose contract was due for renewal — effectively a pool of one. She had been off sick with work-related stress since May 2019 and never returned before her dismissal.
The tribunal found the dismissal was by reason of redundancy, but the procedure was unfair. The Trust had not properly consulted with the nurse or considered alternatives before deciding not to renew her contract. However, the tribunal also found that even with a fair procedure, there was a 50% chance she would have been dismissed anyway, given the genuine financial pressures and the limited alternatives available.
What could have been done differently
The Trust could have avoided the unfair dismissal finding by engaging in a more thorough consultation process, including exploring alternative roles or flexible working arrangements. The nurse was offered a Band 5 post on a different ward, but the timing and manner of that offer were criticised. A fair process would have given her more time and support to consider the option, especially given her health issues.
Why this matters
This case highlights that even in a 'pool of one' redundancy, employers must follow a fair procedure. The Polkey reduction shows that compensation can be substantially reduced if the employee would likely have been dismissed anyway. For employees on fixed-term contracts, it is important to know that non-renewal due to redundancy can still be challenged as unfair dismissal if the process is flawed.
Similar cases
29-year employee dismissed without any redundancy process after company sale
A warehouse operative with 29 years' service was found to have been unfairly dismissed after her employer sold the business and mistakenly treated her as an agency worker. The tribunal awarded over £11,000 in compensation.
Redundancy during maternity leave: unfair dismissal but no compensation
An English & Maths Community Coordinator with 9 years' service was unfairly dismissed by Birmingham Metropolitan College during maternity leave, but the tribunal awarded no compensation due to a 100% Polkey reduction.
Fixed-term NHS employee unable to bring unfair dismissal claim due to insufficient service
An NHS employee on a fixed-term contract had their unfair dismissal and redundancy claims thrown out because they lacked the required continuous service. The tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the case.
Sales manager dismissed in flawed redundancy process wins £4,105 after 80% Polkey cut
A 66-year-old sales manager with 7 years' service was unfairly dismissed after a flawed redundancy consultation during the pandemic, but the tribunal reduced his compensation by 80% because he would likely have been dismissed anyway.