If an employer is faced with making redundancies, they will need to demonstrate that there is a genuine redundancy situation, that the employee was chosen fairly, and that a proper consultation process was followed before letting the employee go.

Employers must also take reasonable steps to find alternative employment for the employee within the business before their employment ends. Failure to tick any of these boxes may result in the employee (provided they have more than two years’ continuous service) bringing a successful claim for unfair dismissal.

In the case of Hendy Group Ltd v Daniel Kennedy [2024] EAT 106, the employer (Hendy Group) fell short at the final hurdle.

The claim

Mr Kennedy worked as a trainer for Hendy Group and had around 30 years of experience in the motor industry, particularly in sales. In 2020, a redundancy situation arose, and while Mr Kennedy accepted both the need for the redundancy and that he had been fairly selected, he ultimately brought a claim in the Employment Tribunal (ET) on the basis that Hendy Group had failed to properly explore whether he could be retained in a different role before ending his employment

The decision

The ET found that although there were multiple sales roles available within the company and Mr Kennedy was told he could apply for roles via the company’s website, Hendy Group did not actively support him in doing so. Despite his efforts to make applications and attend interviews, he was repeatedly rejected, and was even blocked from making further applications. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) upheld the ET’s conclusion that Mr Kennedy’s dismissal was unfair due to Hendy Group’s failure to assist him in finding alternative employment, which likely cost him the chance to stay within the company.

The takeaways

The key takeaway from this case is that employers have a duty to more than just signpost employees at risk of redundancy to a current vacancies list. Mr Kennedy was told he could apply for alternative roles on the company’s website (in the same way as any external candidate would be able to apply for roles). Beyond this, the HR department made no efforts to assist Mr Kennedy in making those applications. The ET/EAT gave examples of the type of assistance Hendy Group could have provided, which included:

• speaking to Mr Kennedy about where his interests might lie
• encouraging conversations with him about different roles
• suggesting particular roles Mr Kennedy might be interested in or suitable for
• telling other managers in the business that Mr Kennedy was at risk of redundancy (the inference being that the other managers could take this into consideration when reviewing his application)

The ET was also critical of other actions taken by Hendy Group, such as the HR team sending communications about Mr Kennedy’s job applications to his work email address after they had removed his access to the company’s systems. They also criticised a particular email which rejected his open applications and advised that while he could still submit further applications for other roles, these applications would also be rejected.

This case serves as a reminder to employers that they need to take active steps to help redundant employees find alternative employment.