header-logo header-logo

Free choice?

09 September 2011 / John McMullen
Issue: 7480 / Categories: Features , Disciplinary&grievance procedures , Employment
printer mail-detail
hires_0_4

John McMullen examines fairness in redundancy selection cases

In unfair dismissal law it is axiomatic in redundancy cases that an employer must develop objective selection criteria and apply them fairly (Williams v Compair Maxam [1982] ICR 156, [1982] IRLR 83). This article examines what controls on managerial prerogative exist in this area.

Primary rule

The primary rule is that the employer must use a method of selection which is fair in general terms and is applied reasonably (Eaton v King and Others [1995] IRLR 75 (EAT); [1996] IRLR 199 (CA)). As the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) stated in Greig v Sir Alfred McAlpine & Son Northern (Ltd) [1979] IRLR 372 “…in considering the reasonableness of a redundancy dismissal, where a selection has to be made between those who are to be retained and those who are to be dismissed, the most important matter upon which the employer has to satisfy the tribunal is that he acted reasonably in respect of the selection of the particular employee. That normally involves

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll