Angela Bonney v Gaudin & Co Limited: [2023] TRE 213

Ms Bonney who was employed by Gaudin & Co Limited as an Office Manager, filed a complaint alleging unfair dismissal after being made redundant.

The primary issue for the Tribunal was to determine the fairness of the redundancy process.

Ms. Bonney, started employment in April 2015, was asked in late 2022 to outline her duties for a job description, which she did, but no formal description was created.

Board meetings in December 2022 and June 2023 discussed financial risks, including potential redundancies due to a slowing property market and high interest rates.

In July 2023, discussions on potential redundancies led to a business case being drafted for making the Office Manager post redundant, highlighting cost-saving measures and a decline in necessary tasks.

The redundancy decision was finalised in early September 2023, with Ms. Bonney being notified on 12 September and formally made redundant on 3 October 2023.

Ms. Bonney proposed alternative roles, which were rejected for various reasons, including financial savings and lack of necessity.

Her appeal against the redundancy was rejected, with the Company following a fair process involving warnings, consultations, and consideration of suitable alternative employment.

The Tribunal found the redundancy genuine and the process fair, leading to the dismissal of Ms. Bonney’s claim of unfair dismissal.

KEY WORDS: Employment; Redundancy; Pool of One

A Tribunal judgment analysing whether an employer’s decision to make an employee redundant from a pool of one was a fair reason to dismiss. Ultimately in this case the Tribunal determined that the employer had engaged in a fair redundancy process.