in person For the v Respondent — 2022

The claimant's Business Improvement Manager role was caught by a 2021 restructure for the new Industry Partnership for Digital Railway. Consultation documents showed that the role did not map into the proposed structure and that all accountabilities for the post were removed and not transferred. The claimant was told he was at risk of redundancy, took part in consultation and closed-list redeployment steps, and applied for the Business Manager role, which he lost in a competitive interview to Debbie Edwards.

The tribunal accepted that redundancy was a potentially fair reason for dismissal and found that the warning period, consultation, identification process and search for alternative employment were, in broad terms, reasonable. It rejected the claimant's complaints about the interview notes, the composition of the panel, alleged conflict of interest, and diversity concerns as separate points of unfairness. It also found that he knew about the Programme Reporting Specialist role during the closed-list stage but chose not to apply for it, and that the later decision not to fill that role did not make the dismissal unfair.

The tribunal upheld the unfair dismissal claim because the respondent did not follow its own Managing our People Through Change policy for the Business Manager selection process. The policy required a paper-based selection exercise by a panel including an HR representative, with interview only if necessary, but the respondent moved directly to interview and did so without HR involvement because HR was said to be too busy. The tribunal held that this departure from the agreed process fell outside the range of reasonable responses. Remedy was not decided at this judgment and was left for a later hearing.