Mr N Ferris v City of York Council Heard at Leeds — 2025

Three-member tribunal sitting in Leeds heard the claimant's claim for a statutory redundancy payment against City of York Council under part XI of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The parties agreed the claimant (Corporate Director for Place) was dismissed by reason of redundancy on 27 August 2024; the only issue was whether he had unreasonably refused an offer of suitable alternative employment under s.141(2) and (3) ERA 1996.

The tribunal refused to admit purported expert evidence from a third party with no involvement in the redundancy process (applying De Keyser Limited v Wilson [2001] IRLR 324 and noting the matter was for the tribunal). It found that the offered role of Director of City Development was not suitable alternative employment: it represented a clear reduction in status amounting to a demotion (the claimant would no longer be a Corporate Director, would sit as a peer to his former direct reports, and would have a substantially reduced scope of responsibility), and there was a 10% pay cut. The tribunal noted any reasonable person would consider their role in the organisation diminished, and the change would impact the claimant's future career prospects in a small senior local-government job market.

As the tribunal found the offer was not suitable, it could not also conclude the claimant unreasonably refused (although it observed that, had the role been suitable, the claimant's complete disengagement from the consultation process might have made his refusal unreasonable). Pursuant to s.163 ERA 1996, with 10 complete years' service at age 55 and earnings well above the statutory cap, the claimant was entitled to 1.5 weeks' pay at £700 per week per complete year, totalling £10,500.