Individual redundancy consultation 





An employer who has provisionally selected an employee for redundancy must write to them warning of the risk of redundancy and invite them to an individual consultation meeting (Alexander and Hatherley v Bridgen Enterprises Ltd [2006] IRLR 422). Before the meeting, the employer must provide details of the selection criteria, the member’s scores and an explanation of the scoring method, to give the employee a genuine opportunity to challenge the decision (Pinewood Repro Limited t/a County Print v Page [2010] UKEAT 0028). Employers do not need to provide the scores of other employees (British Aerospace v Green [1995] IRLR 433). 





Fair consultation involves providing a proper opportunity for the person to fully understand the issues and to express their views, giving genuine consideration to those views and providing a reasoned response (R v British Coal ex parte Price [1994] IRLR 72).



A broadly fair and non-discriminatory consultation process is likely to be judged adequate. Tribunals do not “micro-manage” the details of redundancy selection. They are not allowed to interfere by, for example, re-scoring someone because they disagree with the employer’s original assessment. 


A procedure does not have to be perfect. It just needs to be broadly fair.
Even so, defects in a redundancy process such as a lack of consistency when applying selection criteria are still important. They can affect the overall fairness of the dismissal (Mental Health Care (UK) Limited v Biluan [2012] UKEAT/0248/12/SM). They can also indicate hidden discrimination or victimisation, or even manipulation of the criteria to produce the employer’s desired outcome. 





A dismissal is not unfair just because the employer has not provided accurate (or even any) minutes of a redundancy consultation meeting (Camelot PLC v Hogg [2011] UKEATS/0019/10/BI). 




Acas recommends using a formal redundancy appeals procedure. Whoever hears the appeal should be senior to the original decision maker. Not allowing an appeal can make an otherwise fair dismissal unfair (West Midlands Cooperative Society v Tipton [1986] ICR 192) because it denies the employee a chance to change the outcome (London Central Bus Company v Manning [2013] UKEAT/0103/13). 




In large-scale redundancies, employers sometimes use a “sifting” process in which employees are asked to appeal in writing first, identifying specific issues of concern. Only those who pass through this initial sifting process get a full appeal hearing. As long as the overall selection process is fair, sifting in this way will not make a dismissal unfair (Camelot PLC v Hogg [2011] UKEATS/0019/10/BI).



Every case depends on its own facts and the overall fairness of the process, including any appeal. A “perfunctory and insensitive” redundancy consultation made a redundancy dismissal unfair in Thomas v BNP Paribas Real Estate Advisory and Property Management UK Limited [2016] UKEAT/0134/16/JOJ.




All good redundancy procedures allow those at risk to be accompanied by a union rep or co-worker to redundancy consultation meetings but surprisingly, there is no statutory right to be accompanied to a redundancy consultation meeting (Heathmill Multimedia ASP Limited v Jones [2003] IRLR 856). Even so, there is a statutory right to be accompanied to any grievance meeting about the redundancy process that concerns a legal right, such as non-payment of redundancy pay, trade union victimisation or discriminatory targeting for redundancy. 





Special arrangements to be accompanied should be made for disabled or young workers, or those who do not speak English as a first language (see Chapter 10: Right to be accompanied).





The Acas Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures does not apply to ordinary redundancy consultation meetings, but it does apply to grievance meetings about the redundancy process such as allegations of discrimination or unlawful selection.



Information generated during a redundancy selection process about individual employees (such as individual scores, or the meeting note of their redundancy selection meeting) is personal data to which the General Data Protection Regulation applies. Employees have a legal right to see this material by making a data subject access request (see Chapter 15: Data Protection and the Information Commissioner’s website). 


Data protection laws do not allow workers to see data on “management forecasting” or planning such as future redundancy plans where this would prejudice the conduct of the business.