Mrs L Thomson v Scottish Police Authority — 2019

Mrs L Thomson had been employed by the Scottish Police Authority since 31 March 2003 and had worked as a Recruitment Manager since 2014. In 2017 the respondent began restructuring its People and Development function. By January 2018 her post was identified as at risk, she was consulted on the new structure, and she was told about the respondent's scheme offering voluntary redundancy or voluntary early retirement, together with the option of remaining in a supernumerary pool pending redeployment.

The tribunal considered whether the termination of employment under the SPA Voluntary Redundancy/Early Retirement Scheme amounted to a dismissal. It accepted that the scheme paperwork used mixed terminology, including references to redundancy, early retirement and redundancy retiral, but held that the labels used in documents did not determine the legal character of the termination. Relying on Birch and Humber v University of Liverpool and the need to look at the realities of the facts rather than the form of the transactions, the tribunal asked whether there had been pressure on the claimant to resign or terminate her contract in a way that amounted in reality to dismissal.

On the facts found, the tribunal concluded there was no such pressure. It found that the claimant did not apply for the advertised Band M role, chose not to enter the supernumerary pool, and on 3 May 2018 stated that voluntary early retirement was her preferred option and that she no longer wanted to work within the organisation. Her application for VER was accepted on 26 June 2018 and she signed to leave on 3 July 2018, knowing the decision was binding.

The tribunal held that the claimant's employment terminated by mutual agreement under the VER option, in return for an ex-gratia payment and added pension years. It found that she had not been made redundant and had not been dismissed under s.95 ERA 1996. The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed.