Dispatch supervisor made redundant without any consultation: unfair dismissal award
A dispatch supervisor with four years' service was unfairly dismissed when her employer made her redundant without a proper selection pool, objective criteria, or any meaningful consultation. The tribunal awarded £661.95 in compensation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Dispatch Supervisor from 8 January 2018 to 25 February 2022.
- The respondent was a small company manufacturing framed prints and was struggling commercially.
- The claimant was selected for redundancy without a proper pool or objective selection criteria.
- The claimant was not given meaningful consultation before the decision to dismiss was made.
- The respondent conceded 5 days' holiday pay were owed.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working as a Dispatch Supervisor for the respondent.
-
Incident with Mr Cox
A physical altercation occurred between the claimant and a colleague, but no disciplinary action was taken.
-
Furlough started
Claimant was placed on furlough until 1 November 2021, but the scheme ended on 30 September 2021.
-
Operation and sick leave
Claimant had an operation and was signed off work until 13 December 2021.
-
Return to work
Claimant returned to work after being sent home in December.
-
Redundancy letter
Claimant was handed a letter stating she was being considered for redundancy.
-
Redundancy meeting
Claimant attended a meeting where she was handed a final redundancy letter; no meaningful consultation occurred.
-
Employment ended
Claimant's employment terminated.
-
New employment started
Claimant started a new job after receiving four offers.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's dismissal for redundancy was fair, and whether she was owed any unpaid holiday pay.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claim for unfair dismissal but dismissed the holiday pay claim (except for 5 days agreed by the parties).
Key reasons:
- The employer did not consider a proper selection pool or use objective criteria.
- There was no meaningful consultation before the decision to dismiss.
- The employer would have dismissed the claimant in any event, so a 50% Polkey reduction applied.
Compensation breakdown:
- Compensatory award for loss of statutory rights: £350
- Unpaid holiday pay (5 days): £311.95
- Total: £661.95
Lessons & takeaways
- Even in a small company, you must consider a fair selection pool and use objective criteria when making redundancies.
- Meaningful consultation with the employee before the decision to dismiss is essential, even if the business is struggling.
- If you cannot prove that a fair process would have made no difference, a Polkey reduction may be applied, but it won't eliminate the award entirely.
When a redundancy process goes wrong
This case shows how a small employer's failure to follow basic redundancy procedures can lead to an unfair dismissal finding, even when the business is genuinely struggling. The claimant, a dispatch supervisor with four years' service, was handed a redundancy letter with no prior warning, no discussion about alternative roles, and no objective selection criteria. The entire process took just three days from the first letter to the final decision.
What the employer could have done differently
The tribunal noted that the employer, Ixion Limited (trading as 1Clickprint), did not consider which employees should be in the redundancy pool, nor did it apply any measurable criteria to select the claimant. A reasonable employer would have at least considered the pool, warned the employee, and consulted before deciding. Even a small company with limited resources can hold a meeting to discuss alternatives and explain the reasoning.
Why the result matters
The tribunal applied a 50% Polkey reduction, meaning it found that even with a fair process the claimant would likely have been dismissed anyway. But that did not wipe out the award entirely. The claimant received £350 for loss of statutory rights plus £311.95 in holiday pay. This case is a reminder that procedural fairness is not optional in redundancy situations, and that employees who are denied a fair process can still recover compensation even if the outcome would have been the same.
Similar cases
Redundancy dismissal found unfair but 100% Polkey deduction applied
A former employee with 12 years' service was unfairly dismissed by reason of redundancy, but a 100% Polkey deduction meant no compensatory award. The tribunal awarded £4,362.20 for redundancy, unpaid wages, holiday pay, and other losses.
Sales Executive made redundant after scoring was completed post-decision: unfair dismissal
A sales executive with 5 years' service was unfairly dismissed after his employer decided to make him redundant before applying any selection criteria. The tribunal awarded £8,079.20, reduced by 20% for the chance he might have been dismissed fairly.
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.
Kitchen manager dismissed without consultation in redundancy: unfair dismissal
A kitchen manager with two years' service was unfairly dismissed when her employer made her redundant without any consultation or warning. The tribunal awarded £4,809.49 in compensation.