Mr R Hignett (Counsel) For the v Respondent — 2020

Mr Walton was dismissed in a redundancy exercise within GE Aviation Systems' MSO division. The tribunal found that the employer was facing genuine cost and headcount reduction, that the European military accounts team was reorganised, and that the claimant's EB-level management role was being removed and split between a lower-band team leader and Mr Moll. It therefore accepted that there was a genuine redundancy situation and that redundancy was the reason for dismissal.

The tribunal accepted the respondent's selection pool decision. It found that Ms Helm had applied her mind to whether Mr Carlisle or Mr Backx should be included, noted the differences in division, pay structure and role content, and held that a pool of one was one a reasonable employer could choose. It also rejected the claimant's argument that the redundancy itself was contrived.

The dismissal was nevertheless held unfair because the consultation and search for alternatives were not sufficient. The claimant attended multiple consultation meetings, but the tribunal found that the respondent did not tell him that his terms and conditions could be ring-fenced if he moved into the new team leader role, and that the conversations with Mr Moll on 1 and 2 August 2018 discouraged him from applying. The tribunal also found that the dismissal was more likely than not pre-determined in favour of Scott Keating as successor. It did not find unfairness in the respondent's handling of the separate EB Power role, where it accepted that the interview process was reasonable.

On age discrimination, the tribunal accepted that there had been discussions about the age profile of the team and proximity to retirement, and that enquiries were made about the claimant's age and retirement intentions. Even so, it found that the respondent's reason for removing the claimant's role was cost reduction and organisational change, not age. The direct age discrimination claims were dismissed, while the indirect age discrimination claim was withdrawn during the hearing. Remedy was left to a separate hearing.