Ms C Urquhart, Counsel For the v Mr T Hussain, Litigation Consultant — 2021

Ms Lynn Isham was employed as Club Steward by Stanstead Abbotts and St Margaret’s Village Club. In March 2021 the Club was closed during lockdown and accepted that it was losing money, so it decided to make both Club Steward roles redundant and to have officers and committee members take on back-of-house work. The tribunal accepted there was a redundancy situation within s.98 ERA 1996 and s.139 ERA 1996.

The dismissal was nevertheless unfair. Mr Barnwell did not set out the redundancy proposals in writing at the outset, did not properly explore the Claimant's written offer to consider a reduction in hours and wages, and did not meaningfully consider redeployment or the possibility of a new role. The appeal did not correct those failings: Mr Quinn said there were no active roles, even though Ms Gay was then offered a zero-hours arrangement and discussion of a possible Bar Manager role only days later. Applying Williams v Compair Maxam Ltd. and Haycocks v ADP RPO Ltd., the tribunal held the Club acted unreasonably under s.98(4) ERA 1996.

On Polkey, the tribunal found there was a 25% chance the Claimant would have been dismissed for redundancy in any event, but a 75% chance she would have been appointed to the proposed Bar Manager role had she been given a fair opportunity to be considered. The direct age discrimination claim under s.13 EqA 2010 was dismissed because the tribunal found the decision-makers did not have the Claimant's age in mind and did not infer that the different treatment was because of age; the difference was attributed to the flawed consultation process and Mr Barnwell's wish to reassure Ms Gay because of her anxieties. The supplied reasons do not record a monetary award.