Mr T Michael v Freudenberg Oil & Gas Technologies Limited — 2022

Mr T Michael was employed by Freudenberg Oil & Gas Technologies Limited from 21 October 2013 and later became Mechanical Maintenance Engineer in February 2018. After his wife's death in September 2017, the respondent supported his phased return to work. The tribunal found that Mr Jenkins approved the claimant's parental leave once HR confirmed his entitlement, and it rejected the claimant's evidence that Mr Jenkins had been hostile or had refused the request.

In May 2020 the respondent launched Project Horizon Phase III in response to reduced drilling activity, lower capital expenditure and the impact of the pandemic. The Maintenance Department selection pool was reduced to two Mechanical Maintenance Engineers, Mr Michael and Dewi Slyman, because the respondent concluded that the electrically qualified roles were not at risk. The selection criteria were performance, skills, disciplinary action, length of service and current role/experience, and attendance. Mr Jenkins scored the two employees using their most recent appraisals. The tribunal found that he did so objectively, that the pool and criteria had been agreed with employee representatives, and that it did not accept the claimant's allegations about document manipulation or improper influence.

Applying Kuzel and the statutory test in s.98 ERA 1996, the tribunal rejected the contention that the claimant's exercise of parental leave was the real reason for dismissal. It found that redundancy was the principal reason, that the claimant was given three consultation meetings and a fair opportunity to challenge the process, and that the appeal conducted by Mr Andrew Thomas was reasonable. The tribunal also found that reasonable steps had been taken to identify suitable alternative employment, but none was available. The claim was therefore dismissed. The judgment determined liability only and did not make a remedy award.