22-year manager loses redundancy claim despite unredeployed status
A Curriculum and Quality Assurance Manager with 22 years' service was fairly dismissed for redundancy after failing to apply for redeployment roles, the tribunal ruled.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #redundancy
- #redeployment
- #salary-dispute
- #individual-right-of-review
- #honoraria-payment
Key facts
- The claimant was employed from 22 February 1999 to 31 March 2021 as Curriculum and Quality Assurance Manager.
- The claimant submitted an Individual Right of Review (IRR) application on 1 June 2016 seeking a salary increase, but it was never approved.
- The claimant was not informed of the IRR outcome until 2020.
- The respondent closed the Community Language Service in late December 2020, leading to the claimant's redundancy.
- The claimant was given access to the redeployment register from September 2020 but did not apply for any roles.
- The claimant's employment terminated on 31 March 2021 by reason of redundancy.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
The claimant started working for the respondent in the Community Language Service.
-
Additional duties assumed
The claimant assumed early GCSE duties and additional responsibilities.
-
First honoraria payment approved
Ms Hussain approved an honoraria payment for the claimant.
-
Email agreeing salary increase
Ms Hussain sent an email agreeing a backdated salary increase, but this was not via the proper IRR process.
-
Second honoraria payment approved
Judith St John approved a one-off honoraria payment of £2400.
-
Meeting with HR
The claimant met with Michelle Vincent who advised him to use the IRR procedure for a salary increase.
-
IRR application submitted
The claimant submitted an IRR application for a salary increase.
-
New contracts issued
The respondent issued new employment contracts, effective 13 April 2020, superseding previous agreements.
-
Access to redeployment register
The claimant was given access to the respondent's redeployment register.
-
Notice of redundancy
The claimant was issued with notice of redundancy.
-
Employment terminated
The claimant's employment ended by reason of redundancy.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer acted fairly in dismissing the claimant for redundancy, particularly regarding its efforts to redeploy him, and whether the claimant was owed unpaid salary increases.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims, including unfair dismissal and unauthorised deductions from wages.
- The claimant, a Curriculum and Quality Assurance Manager with 22 years' service, was made redundant when the Community Language Service closed in December 2020.
- He was given access to the redeployment register from September 2020 but did not apply for any roles, despite being aware of vacancies.
- The tribunal found the employer's actions were within the range of reasonable responses, and the claimant's failure to engage with the redeployment process undermined his claim.
- The claim for unpaid salary increases also failed because the proper IRR process was never completed, and the employer had issued new contracts in 2020 that superseded any prior agreements.
- No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees facing redundancy should proactively apply for suitable alternative roles to strengthen any unfair dismissal claim.
- Length of service does not automatically make a redundancy dismissal unfair if the employer follows a reasonable process.
- Informal agreements about salary increases are not legally binding unless the employer's formal procedures are followed.
- Failing to engage with the redeployment register can be fatal to a claim that the employer did not do enough to avoid redundancy.
A long-serving employee who was made redundant after his department closed has lost his unfair dismissal claim because he did not apply for any of the redeployment roles available to him.
The case in practice
The claimant, a Curriculum and Quality Assurance Manager, had worked for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets for 22 years. When the Community Language Service was shut down in late 2020, he was placed on the redeployment register. Despite being encouraged to apply for vacancies, he did not submit a single application. He argued that the employer should have done more to find him a suitable role, but the tribunal disagreed.
The tribunal noted that the employer had given him access to the register and provided details of roles. The claimant's failure to apply meant the employer could not be criticised for not offering him alternative employment. The dismissal was therefore fair.
What could have been done differently?
The claimant also pursued a claim for unpaid salary increases, arguing that he had been promised a higher salary years earlier. However, the tribunal found that the proper Individual Right of Review process had not been completed, and the employer had issued new contracts in 2020 that superseded any prior informal agreements. The claim for unauthorised deductions failed.
Why this matters
This case highlights the importance of employees actively engaging with the redeployment process during redundancy. Even with long service, a failure to apply for available roles can undermine a claim that the employer acted unfairly. It also shows that informal salary promises are unlikely to be enforceable unless formal procedures are followed.
Similar cases
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.
22-year employee unfairly dismissed after Boots failed to consider redeployment
A customer adviser with 22 years' service was unfairly dismissed by Boots after a redundancy exercise that failed to properly explore alternative roles. The tribunal upheld the unfair dismissal claim but dismissed race-related complaints.
21-year teacher loses unfair dismissal claim after redundancy consultation
A Subject Leader with 21 years' service was fairly dismissed when her school restructured its EAL department. The tribunal found the consultation and consideration of alternative roles were reasonable.
17-year employee loses unfair dismissal claim over redundancy scoring
A workshop planning co-ordinator with 17 years' service failed to prove his redundancy selection was unfair or discriminatory. The tribunal found Jaguar Land Rover's process was reasonable.