Limited consultation

Case 4: The facts

Following a fall-off in sales, Ms Rogers was made redundant, but her employer did not tell her of its plan to restructure until it had decided to remove her role. She claimed that her dismissal was therefore unfair.

The ruling

The tribunal had found that Rogers had been consulted about a week before her dismissal and that, while this was the “bare minimum–, it was reasonable in the circumstances. It had also said that her husband’s reaction to the announcement of potential redundancy had discouraged any further attempt to consult.

Although another tribunal may have come to a different conclusion, the Employment Appeal Tribunal said, the tribunal in Rogers’ case was entitled to find as it did based on the facts. It upheld the finding that the dismissal was fair.

Rogers v Slimma Plc UKEAT/0168/06