in person For the v Respondent — 2022

Mr B Meunier had worked for St Michael’s Hospice since 18 September 2006, most recently as Head of ICT and Technical Services. The tribunal found that, following the pandemic and lockdown in late March 2020, the respondent faced severe financial pressure and was required to make 10% cost savings without affecting clinical services. A review of non-clinical roles led to the claimant’s post being identified in a scoring matrix, and the tribunal accepted that the matrix was prepared in May 2020 and fairly applied. The tribunal rejected the suggestion that the claimant’s role had been added later or that the redundancy process was personal or based on the earlier 2016 or 2019 IT audits.

The tribunal held that the statutory definition of redundancy in section 139 ERA 1996 was satisfied because the respondent’s need for employees to carry out work of that kind had diminished and the claimant’s role was not replaced. Applying section 98(4) ERA 1996, and taking guidance from Williams & Ors v Compair Maxam Ltd, Safeway Stores v Burrell and Polkey v A E Dayton Services Ltd, the tribunal found that the decision to remove the IT manager post was within the range of reasonable responses. It found that the claimant was in a unique role and could properly be placed in a pool of one, so selection criteria were not required between comparable employees.

The tribunal also found that the claimant was adequately warned and consulted, having attended multiple consultation meetings, received written responses to his suggestions, and been offered an appeal. It accepted that no suitable alternative vacancies were available in IT, that the claimant did not apply for the alternative roles offered, and that the respondent was not required to create a role for him. The tribunal further found that the appeal was fairly handled by a trustee who had not been involved in the redundancy process in a way that prevented impartial consideration. The claim for unfair dismissal was therefore dismissed.