The issue of 'bumping' in redundancies was one which we have previously posted articles about, and one which caused some concern for employers. However as it stated at the time it should only be used in very exceptional circumstances and is not a prerequisite for alternatives to redundancy.
This brings up the issue of alternatives to redundancy, and a recent EAT case where the Tribunal found the employers argument more favorable than the employees, in what is a welcome site for employers.
The case (UD1262/2011) centered on an employee claiming he was unfairly dismissed as the employer did not secure suitable alternative employment for the employee in order to avoid a redundancy. The employee was working in a university and his role was dependent on funding but when the funding ran out was then made redundant. The Employee rejected any redundancy payment, and although the employer tried to secure him alternative employment they were unsuccessful and so the employee was made redundant.
Determination
The case is relatively clear cut in terms of the redundancy itself as the role was subject to funding which both parties accepted, and when the funding ran out the role was no longer available. The Tribunal clarified by saying it is the position not the person that is made redundant which was not in dispute.
However when it comes the the securing of alternative employment the tribunals determination is worth noting, as the employee alleged that the employer did not send the employees CV to every possible source and that there were others who should have been selected ahead of him. The Tribunal views this as;
“the respondent is obliged in law to make reasonable efforts to secure alternative employment for the employee. The respondent is not obliged to make some other employee redundant in order to give that position to the claimant. It is the position not the person that is made redundant. The respondent is not obliged in law to make arduous efforts exhaustive every single possibility available. The respondent did make reasonable attempts to secure alternative employment for the claimant and their shortcomings in this regard are not such as to render the redundancy an unfair dismissal.”
Impact for Employers
The employees claim for unfair dismissal was unsuccessful and this case should be a welcome sight to employers, that yes they should make reasonable attempts to secure alternative employment but that shortcomings in this are not such as to render the redundancy an unfair dismissal.
Further Reading
