The Supreme Court has refused permission to appeal in the case of Joseph de Bank Haycocks v ADP ROP UK Limited which considered whether a redundancy process can be considered fair when an employer assesses and scores the employee(s) in question before the consultation process begins.
Background
Mr Haycocks was employed by the Respondent, a recruitment company, from 16 October 2017, until he was dismissed by reason of redundancy on 30 June 2020 in response to a diminution in vacancies resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic.
In May 2020, the Respondent decided that it would need to make redundancies in Mr Haycock’s team. On 10 or 11 June 2020, Mr Haycock’s line manager assessed the affected employees against a “redundancy selection criteria matrix” and Mr Haycocks came out with the lowest overall score. He was told at a meeting on 30 June 2020 that he was at risk of redundancy and that a consultation process would follow.
Mr Haycocks was subsequently made redundant on 14 July 2020 after the consultation process and brought a claim for unfair dismissal in the Employment Tribunal.
For the purposes of this appeal, it is key to note that Mr Haycocks was not sent his scores until after his dismissal and he was not told during the process that the scoring exercise has been carried out before the consultation began.
The Employment Tribunal Decision
The Employment Tribunal (ET) dismissed Mr Haycocks’ claim, finding that the redundancy process had been fair.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal Decision
Mr Haycocks appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). The EAT found that the Respondent’s failure to consult with Mr Haycocks at a formative stage of the process rendered his dismissal unfair, stating “whilst the appeal could correct any missing aspect of the individual consultation process (e.g. the provision of the Claimant’s…scores), it could not repair [the] gap of consultation in the formative stage”.
Court of Appeal Decision
The Respondent appealed the EAT’s decision to the Court of Appeal (CoA) which allowed the appeal. The CoA did not find any error of law in the ET’s finding that there had been a lack of proper consultation and that the Respondent had conducted a fair redundancy process and the Appellant’s dismissal was not unfair.
Supreme Court Decision
Mr Haycock subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court who have now refused to grant permission to appeal. This means that the Court of Appeal’s decision that a redundancy process can be considered fair when an employer assesses and scores the employee(s) in question before the consultation process begins will stand.
For more information on following a fair redundancy procedure, please contact a member of the Glaisyers ETL Employment team.
