Unfair redundancy

Case 8: The facts

A group of welders were made redundant following a redundancy selection exercise. They were given their scores in each criteria but not told how they had been assessed. Before their appeal hearing, their union rep was given the selection criteria and guidelines and the marks given to all staff - but with the names of staff removed. The welders claimed that their dismissals were unfair.

The ruling

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that the welders should have been given their marks and details of how they had been assessed before the "step 2" dismissal hearing. Without this, it was impossible for them or their rep to argue whether the marks were unfair.

By failing to supply this information in time, the employer had failed to follow the statutory dismissal and disciplinary procedure - step 2 of which requires employees to be told the basis of their dismissal and given the opportunity to respond.

The welders were awarded four weeks' pay for this failure, but the EAT found that they would have been dismissed even if the procedures had been followed; therefore their dismissals were not unfair overall.

Alexander and Hatherley v Bridgen Enterprises Ltd UKEAT/0107/06