Redundancy selection scoring upheld: fair process and consultation saved the day
A Heating Sales Advisor with five years' service lost his unfair dismissal claim after a tribunal found that British Gas Services Limited followed a fair redundancy process, including collective consultation, objective scoring, and a proper appeal.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Heating Sales Advisor from 21 April 2015 until 4 December 2020.
- The respondent undertook a collective consultation process with the GMB union over four months.
- The selection pool consisted of 370 Level 8 HSAs, with a reduction of 48 FTE roles required.
- The claimant scored the lowest in his pool after a desktop scoring exercise based on technical and behavioural competencies.
- The respondent offered alternative roles and the claimant did not express interest in any.
- The appeal process was conducted by an independent manager who upheld the dismissal.
Timeline
-
Employment start
Claimant began employment as a Heating Sales Advisor.
-
Redundancy programme announced
Centrica plc announced a compulsory redundancy programme with up to 1,566 potential redundancies.
-
Employees informed of possible redundancies
Email sent to employees, including claimant, about possible redundancies.
-
First collective consultation meeting
First of ten collective consultation meetings with unions and employee representatives.
-
Second collective consultation meeting
Pool of 370 Level 8 HSAs and reduction of around 48 FTE announced.
-
Third collective consultation meeting
Proposed selection criteria discussed.
-
Desktop scoring exercise
Mr Davies carried out the desktop scoring for the claimant.
-
National calibration exercise
National calibration of scores carried out by Mr Cox and Ms McCarthy.
-
At-risk letter sent
Claimant notified his role was at risk and invited to individual consultation.
-
First individual consultation meeting
Claimant attended with union rep; did not challenge scoring.
-
Second individual consultation meeting
Claimant's self-scoring discussed; adjourned to 17 November.
-
Grievance raised
Claimant raised grievance about proposed redundancy.
-
Third individual consultation meeting
Final consultation; claimant confirmed no interest in alternative roles.
-
Notice of redundancy issued
Claimant given notice of redundancy.
-
Appeal lodged
Claimant appealed against dismissal.
-
Employment terminated
Claimant's employment ended.
-
Appeal meeting
Appeal meeting with independent manager Mr Barr.
-
Appeal outcome
Mr Barr upheld the decision to dismiss.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed by reason of redundancy, specifically whether the respondent carried out reasonable consultation, used fair selection criteria, and considered alternative employment.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's unfair dismissal claim, ruling that British Gas Services Limited had acted fairly throughout the redundancy process.
Key reasons:
- The respondent conducted extensive collective consultation with the GMB union over four months.
- The selection pool of 370 Level 8 Heating Sales Advisors was appropriate, and the desktop scoring exercise based on technical and behavioural competencies was objective.
- The scores were nationally calibrated to ensure consistency.
- The claimant was offered individual consultation meetings and given the opportunity to challenge his scores, but did not do so.
- Alternative roles were offered, but the claimant did not express interest in any.
- The appeal was handled by an independent manager who upheld the dismissal.
No compensation was awarded as the claim was dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Lengthy collective consultation with a recognised union can significantly strengthen a redundancy process.
- Objective selection criteria, properly calibrated across a large pool, are likely to be accepted by tribunals as fair.
- Employees should actively engage in individual consultation meetings and challenge any scoring they disagree with at the time.
- A fair appeal process conducted by an independent manager can help defend against unfair dismissal claims.
- Declining to consider alternative roles may undermine a claim that the employer failed to look for suitable alternatives.
This case shows that a large-scale redundancy process, when carried out carefully, can withstand a challenge even from a long-serving employee. The claimant, a Heating Sales Advisor with five years' service, was selected for redundancy after scoring the lowest in his pool following a desktop exercise. He argued that the scoring was subjective and that his line manager had a personal grudge against him.
What the employer did right
British Gas Services Limited had announced a major redundancy programme affecting up to 1,566 roles. They engaged in four months of collective consultation with the GMB union, which helped shape the selection criteria. The scoring was based on technical and behavioural competencies, and the scores were nationally calibrated to ensure consistency across 370 employees. The claimant was given several individual consultation meetings, but did not challenge his scores at the time. He was also offered alternative roles but expressed no interest.
Why the tribunal rejected the claim
The tribunal found no evidence that the scoring was predetermined or that the relationship with the manager tainted the process. The selection criteria were objective, the consultation was reasonable, and the appeal was handled by an independent manager who upheld the decision. The claimant's failure to engage with the process or challenge the scores during consultation weakened his case.
What this means for similar claims
This case is a reminder that tribunals will look at the overall fairness of the process, not just the outcome. Employers who follow a structured process with union involvement, objective criteria, and proper consultation are likely to succeed. For employees, it highlights the importance of raising concerns early and engaging fully in consultation and alternative job searches.
Similar cases
Senior Supervisor selected for redundancy after appraisal re-done without his input
A Senior Supervisor with 3.5 years' service was unfairly dismissed when his employer re-did his performance appraisal without consulting him, then failed to provide evidence of the appeal process. The tribunal awarded £16,211.91.
21-year assistant manager loses redundancy claim despite long service
An assistant manager with 21 years' service was fairly dismissed for redundancy after scoring lower than a colleague on selection criteria. The tribunal upheld Boots' process.
27-year mechanic made redundant: selection criteria upheld as fair
A mechanic with 27 years' service was fairly dismissed for redundancy after scoring zero under agreed criteria, the tribunal found. No compensation was awarded.
23 years' service, pool of one, pandemic redundancy: decision upheld
A quality and compliance manager with 23 years' service lost his unfair dismissal claim after being made redundant in a pool of one during the pandemic. The tribunal found the process was fair.