Defining redundancy

Case 1: The facts

Following an internal re-organisation Ian Old was promoted to project manager. However, soon after his promotion his employers decided to delete the post. Without warning Old was told his job was redundant. He claimed that the dismissal was unfair.

The ruling

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that a dismissal attributable to a reduction in the employer's need for employees to do work of a particular kind amounts to a redundancy. It is not for the employer to show that there is an economic justification for the decision to make redundancies. However, tribunals can still consider whether a redundancy amounts to an unfair dismissal, for example, in the absence of any consultation.

* Polyflor v Old EAT/0482/02

Case 2: The facts

Elizabeth Bradley Designs carried out a major reorganisation because they were overstaffed. The company alleged that this did not amount to a redundancy.

The ruling

The EAT pointed out that redundancies can arise when successful employers with plenty of work decide to reorganise their business and conclude that they are overstaffed. There do not have to be financial problems or a reduction in work. Even if there is the same amount of revenue coming in and the same amount of work, a decision to employ fewer staff can amount to a redundancy.

* Kingwell and others v Elizabeth Bradley Designs EAT/0661/02