Mrs Serona Rodrigues v London Borough of Waltham Forest — 2024

The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy following a wider reorganisation of the Adult Learning Service. It accepted that the respondent had a genuine redundancy situation, that the claimant and comparable Programme Manager and Senior Programme Manager colleagues were placed at risk as part of the same process, and that the claimant chose not to apply for one of the new ring-fenced Curriculum Manager roles. The unfair dismissal complaint was dismissed.

The statutory redundancy payment claim succeeded. Although the claimant had declined to participate in the ring-fenced selection process, the tribunal found she had not refused a specific offer of renewal or re-engagement capable of acceptance as a binding contract, and so she was not disentitled from a redundancy payment. The tribunal awarded £3,426.

The direct race discrimination claim was dismissed. The tribunal found no facts from which it could conclude that the 2022 redundancy consultation, the restructuring decisions, the handling of the Deputy Head of Skills vacancy, or the earlier management and recruitment matters were because of race. The 2017 recruitment allegation was also found to be out of time and not extended.

The victimisation claim succeeded only in part. The tribunal accepted that the 31 March 2022 FAW grievance was a protected act and rejected most alleged detriments, including the delay and alleged failures in the initial FAW investigation. However, it found that when the claimant later identified other Indian women and alleged a recurring pattern during the FAW appeal, the respondent did not properly investigate or respond to that issue. Remedy for that limited finding was reserved.