Sarah Hardy was one of 26 employees told they would be made redundant when their office closed. She argued that her employer had a duty to consult representatives. Her employer claimed that the duty to consult was not triggered because it expected to redeploy most of the staff, making only 12 redundant, arguing that the duty only arises if 20 or more redundancies are proposed.

However, the EAT held that an employer “proposes to dismiss” if it proposes to withdraw existing contracts. Although Hardy’s employer expected to redeploy some staff, these staff would have to apply for the new jobs, which would be at a different location and have a different job description. This amounted to a proposal to dismiss, so the duty to consult did arise.

Hardy v Tourism South East UKEAT/931/04 [2005] IRLR 242

www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2004/0631_04_2911.html