Miss J Blackwood v Greenwich Leisure Limited — 2023

The tribunal accepted that there was a genuine redundancy situation and that redundancy was the reason for dismissal. It found that the selection criteria and pool were fair on their face, but that the criteria were not applied fairly or reasonably because the scoring relied on sparse and incomplete HR information, did not capture the claimant's qualifications and experience, included absence information that should have been excluded, and used material outside the stated reference period.

The tribunal found that the claimant was warned about redundancy but was not given meaningful consultation. She was not given clear information about the scoring criteria, was not provided with the scoring breakdown or the information relied on, and had no meaningful opportunity to comment on the scores or process. The tribunal also found the appeal was not properly undertaken because the appeal officer did not review the scoring materials or speak to the claimant or the managers involved. The dismissal was therefore procedurally unfair, and no Polkey deduction was appropriate.

The direct sex discrimination complaint was dismissed. The tribunal found no evidence from which it could conclude that sex influenced the redundancy decision, and found that the scoring reflected the information held and the scorers' view of comparative performance rather than sex. The section 18 pregnancy and maternity complaints were also dismissed: the tribunal found the respondent did not know the claimant was pregnant during the redundancy process, and that there was no evidence linking the redundancy process to her earlier maternity leave. The indirect sex discrimination complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal.