Redundancy unfair dismissal – really specific question

[sellotape12]

Hi, ideally looking for someone who knows employment law. I’m in events and PR. I found ACAS to be completely noncommittal saying “maybe, maybe not” to everything. My goal is to push for a better settlement.

upfront facts: I have just over two years continuous service and less than 20 people total are being made redundant. Reason is reduced clients billings, but not on my pieces of business, and they want to remove one person at my job title.

In a redundancy situation, but where I want to make them wobble about unfair dismissal, how likely or unlikely are each of these potential threads?

1. that they did the selection criteria before informing me about the redundancy situation. They said it was all 7, now it’s just me. But I was only informed of this after learning about a redundancy situation.

2. everyone else in the so-called pool is male without caregiving duties.

3. the selection scoring is feedback about minor performance issues and affinity with senior management. It reads like a performance review but I’ve never received any written feedback about my role, or even an appraisal. It also does not speak to future needs of the role or the skill advantages I do have v others. For example I am fluent in other languages and if we want to be attracting more foreign business, I think I’m the best bet for that.

4. an employee who was very recently promoted - so does have the same job title - has been shadowing my meetings for a few months. Unnecessary and has meant doubling up. I believe they were planning on moving him into place before a redundancy situation arose.

5. I am on record telling HR that all projects seem to bypass me and go to the others. I’d also said to HR I had never been able to get an appraisal out of my manager.

thank you

Not specifically an employment lawyer, but I know a lot about employment law.

1. They should not select employees until after employees have been informed and consultations have been held. However, it is unlikely you will win an unfair dismissal case on this ground alone. Also, they may be able to argue that your job is sufficiently different from others to mean that you are in a pool of 1 for redundancy, which is legal.
2. Unless you can make the case that you have been selected for redundancy because you are a woman, this is a non-starter. Your care-giving duties are irrelevant.
3. The lack of written feedback or appraisals is irrelevant. The fact you think they should have used different criteria that gave you credit for being fluent in other languages is irrelevant.
4. The needs of businesses change. If they needed an additional manager at your level at the time he was promoted but reduced billings now mean the need no longer exists, they are in the clear. This only gives you a case if you can convince an employment tribunal that the whole thing has been manipulated to get rid of you.
5. Have you ever raised a formal grievance? If you can show that you were being passed over because you are a woman, you may have a case for discrimination. However, if they were passing over you because others were considered more capable, you don't have a case. Even if you have a case, it may weaken your position if you did not raise a formal grievance.

The above is my view based on my knowledge of employment law. If you want a definitive answer you need to consult a lawyer who specialises in employment law. Your home insurance may be able to help if you have legal cover.