Unfair dismissal – lack of explanation as to how scores arrived at within a redundancy exercise
The case of Mr C Thompson v Powys County Council and The Governing Body of Brynllywarch School highlights how an unfair process in a redundancy dismissal, namely a failure to provide an employee with sufficient information in relation to their scoring, can make the dismissal unfair.
Restructure
Mr Thompson was employed as a teacher. In December 2023, it was determined that two new specialised teaching posts were needed to ensure pupils could access a full curriculum. A proposal was approved to reduce ten general teaching posts to eight general teaching posts and two new specialised roles.
Consultation
The school held a pre-consultation meeting with trade unions in February 2024 and an informal meeting with staff members. Mr Thompson was invited to attend a formal group redundancy consultation meeting and was also able to request an individual consultation meeting, but chose not to.
Skills audit
As part of the selection process, Mr Thompson was asked to complete a skills audit. He submitted an expression of interest for the position of Post 10 (Outdoor Education Instructor/Teacher). This was his first preference out of the available posts, his second preference being Post 4 (Key Stage 3 and 4).
On the 18 April, Mr Thompson was notified that he was at risk of redundancy and provided with a breakdown of his scores. He was given until 29 April to make written or oral representations to the Staff Discipline and Dismissal Committee to reconsider their decision. He followed this up with a request for a copy of the selection criteria, a copy of his skills matrix, anonymous scores of others in the process and details as to how he scored the lowest. He also asked for the deadline to make representations to be delayed so he could prepare. This request was denied. Mr Thompson received the documents except for the selection criteria against which he was scored. Mr Thompson later argued he did not make representations as he could not make any meaningful representations based on the information provided.
Notice of redundancy
Mr Thompson was invited to attend an interview for the position of Post 10 (Outdoor Education Instructor/Teacher) and was unsuccessful. By letter dated 16 May 2024 he received notice of redundancy with effect from 31 August 2024. He did not appeal.
Unfair dismissal
Mr Thompson brought a claim for unfair dismissal in the employment tribunal (ET). The tribunal found the school did not comply with its own Management of Change and Redundancy Policy by failing to provide Mr Thompson with the rationale for his scores.
Subsequently, Mr Thompson had no real means of challenging his selection for redundancy. No evidence had been presented during the proceedings to enable the tribunal to understand how the scores had been arrived at and how fairness had been maintained. This led to Mr Thompson not being able to make representations or raise an appeal. The dismissal was therefore found to be unfair.
Need support with your HR?
Our support means you can focus on education, while we take care of your organisation’s HR needs.
Whether you need help with appraisals, advice on managing a disciplinary or grievance, or guidance on statutory obligations, our education HR specialists can support your school with a flexible and cost-effective service. Get in touch about how we can help you.
The redundancy and restructuring section of our CEFMi website contains model policies, related model letters and forms, and answers to 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.