Unfair dismissal – failure to offer pay protection

Richter v Atomics Educational Trust (formerly Tees Valley Collaborative Trust)

Mr Richter was employed by the trust as a liaison manager, providing support and guidance to pupils, particular those with SEN, as well as managing various other members of staff. He also provided cover teaching when staff were absent.

Restructure

In 2024, a restructure took place to improve operation. Mr Richter applied for the role of deputy head in the newly created SEND Endeavour team. On a practical level, due to his skills and experience, Mr Richter could have performed well in the role. However, he did not meet the qualification requirements of the role which required a professional teaching qualification or qualified teacher status.

Trial period

Mr Richter suggested that he should be allowed a trial period in the role, during which time he would be able to study part-time for the required teaching qualification. The opportunity to study part-time for the qualification had been offered to Mr Richter in the past but he had turned this down.

Alternative role

Mr Richter was advised that he would not be considered for the role and was offered an alternative role of student liaison lead. This role involved working across two sites, one of which involved a more difficult route from Mr Richter’s home. The role was similar to his previous role but did not include cover teaching and amounted to a pay cut of £4,953 a year. He declined the role on the basis it felt like a demotion.

Pay protection

In June 2024, Mr Richter was issued notice of dismissal for redundancy. He appealed and this was considered and dismissed in August 2024. The issue of pay protection, which was part of the trust’s redundancy policy, and which would have been available, was not mentioned at any time to Mr Richter.

Unfair dismissal

Mr Richter brought a claim for unfair dismissal. He argued that he had more than enough experience and expertise to carry out the role of deputy head. Further, had he known about pay protection he would have accepted the alternative role of student liaison lead.

The employment tribunal (ET) held that it was within the range of reasonable responses for the trust to decide Mr Richter was not suitably or sufficiently qualified for the deputy head role. Despite Mr Richter’s experience, the trust was reasonable to stipulate essential requirements, including the holding of formal qualifications for the role.

Breach in policy

However, the ET went on to find the trust’s failure to offer pay protection for the alternative role of student liaison lead was a clear breach of policy. The pay cut imposed on Mr Richter would have exceeded 12%, while at the same time he was being asked to accept extra travel costs by having to commute to two separate sites. By withholding pay protection, the trust had breached its obligation to take steps to minimise or avoid redundancy by redeployment.

The claim of unfair dismissal succeeded, and Mr Richter was awarded £30,723.

Need support with your HR?

Our support means you can focus on education, while we take care of your organisation’s HR needs.

Our core membership service is designed to meet your school’s day-to-day human resource needs, all for a fixed fee. The goal of these services is to help schools and educational institutions to effectively manage their human resources in order to support their overall mission and goals. Get in touch about how we can help you.

The redundancy and restructuring section of our CEFMi website contains model policies, related model forms and letters, and a list of FAQs. Get a free trial of CEFMi – a comprehensive resource for school managers containing over 7,000 pages of text, including over 170 policies written specifically for schools.