Relocation dismissal: employer acted reasonably after failed transfer attempts
A sales assistant who relocated from Milton Keynes to Bournemouth was fairly dismissed after H&M tried but failed to find her a suitable transfer. The tribunal rejected her unfair dismissal claim.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #relocation
- #transfer
- #flexibility
- #furlough
- #covid-19
- #some-other-substantial-reason
Key facts
- The claimant relocated from Milton Keynes to Bournemouth and could no longer work at her original store.
- The claimant's availability was limited to weekday mornings only due to childcare.
- Vacancies in Bournemouth stores required flexibility including evenings and weekends.
- The respondent kept the claimant on furlough and then unpaid leave while seeking a transfer.
- The claimant did not apply for all available vacancies and failed to respond to interview invitations.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant after no suitable vacancy was found.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working as a Sales Assistant at H&M Store 777 in Milton Keynes.
-
Transfer application submitted
Claimant applied for vacancies at Store 614 (Castlepoint, Bournemouth) but the application did not reach the store manager.
-
Lockdown began
UK lockdown started; all H&M stores closed and employees furloughed.
-
Furlough started
Claimant placed on furlough leave.
-
Stores reopened
Some H&M stores reopened; claimant told to report to Milton Keynes but could not due to relocation.
-
No vacancies found
HR manager Letang confirmed no vacancies in Bournemouth stores; claimant remained on furlough.
-
Vacancies advertised
Store 640 advertised 16, 12, and 8 hour vacancies; claimant expressed interest only in 16 hours.
-
Interview attempts
Store manager Jimenez called claimant to arrange interview; claimant did not return calls.
-
Dismissal
Claimant's employment terminated as she could not fulfil her contract at Milton Keynes and no transfer was secured.
-
Appeal hearing
Appeal conducted by Amelia Franklin; decision to dismiss upheld.
The legal issue
Whether the employer acted reasonably in dismissing an employee who could no longer work at her original store due to relocation, and whether it did enough to find her a suitable alternative role.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's unfair dismissal claim, finding that H&M acted reasonably throughout.
- The employer kept the claimant on furlough and unpaid leave for several months while seeking a transfer.
- Vacancies were advertised, but the claimant did not apply for all available roles and failed to respond to interview invitations.
- The dismissal was for 'some other substantial reason' (relocation) and the process was fair.
- No compensation was awarded as the claim failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you relocate and can no longer attend your workplace, tell your employer as soon as possible so they can explore transfer options.
- Employers should make reasonable efforts to find alternative roles, but they are not obliged to create a vacancy or guarantee a transfer.
- Responding to interview invitations and applying for suitable vacancies is crucial — failing to do so can undermine your case.
- A fair process, including keeping the employee on leave while seeking alternatives, can protect an employer from an unfair dismissal finding.
When relocation leads to dismissal
This case shows what happens when an employee's personal move makes it impossible to continue in their job. The sales assistant had worked for H&M for five years but relocated from Milton Keynes to Bournemouth during the pandemic. She could no longer attend her original store, and her availability was limited to weekday mornings due to childcare.
H&M kept her on furlough and later unpaid leave while trying to find a transfer. Vacancies were advertised at two Bournemouth stores, but the claimant did not apply for all of them and did not return calls to arrange interviews. After several months, the employer decided there was no suitable alternative and dismissed her.
What the employer did right
The tribunal noted that H&M acted reasonably by exploring transfer options, keeping the claimant on leave during the process, and giving her a chance to apply for vacancies. The claimant's limited availability and failure to engage with the process meant the employer could not be expected to do more.
If you are an employer facing a similar situation, the key is to document your efforts, communicate clearly, and give the employee a fair opportunity to find a new role. If you are an employee, staying in touch and applying for suitable vacancies is essential — even if the process feels frustrating.
Why this matters
Relocation dismissals are often challenged as unfair, but this case confirms that employers can fairly dismiss if they have a substantial reason (like the employee's inability to attend work) and follow a reasonable process. The outcome also highlights that employees cannot expect their employer to hold a position open indefinitely or create a role that does not exist.
Similar cases
Cleaner dismissed during Covid-19: employer's failure to respond leads to £2,719 payout
A part-time cleaner who was dismissed after asking to be furloughed has won her unfair dismissal claim after her employer failed to submit a response to the tribunal.
Swimming teachers dismissed after furlough dispute: a conduct dismissal that went wrong
A tribunal found that Achieve Lifestyle Ltd unfairly dismissed two swimming teachers after a dispute over furlough pay, and failed to make reasonable adjustments for one teacher with breast cancer.
Furlough refusal during pandemic: HGV driver's constructive dismissal claim fails
An HGV driver with COPD who resigned after his employer refused to furlough him in November 2020 has lost his unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims. The tribunal found the employer correctly interpreted the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme rules.
Zero-hours waitress loses unfair dismissal claim after redundancy exclusion
A waitress on a zero-hours contract who was excluded from a redundancy process has had her unfair dismissal claim dismissed, after a tribunal ruled she was never an employee.