Who just got ￡105,000 in damages after being subjected to a "sham" redundancy?

Kidist Zena, a former management accountant at Verifone, has been awarded nearly ￡105,000 in damages, following a ruling by #Employment Judge Patrick Quill that the #redundancy process leading to her dismissal was "a sham."

Verifone , a firm providing comprehensive payment solutions to clients and specialising in facilitating electronic payment transactions as well as offering value-added services at the point-of-sale, falsely claimed that Zena's redundancy as a regional controller was part of a broader economic strategy to adapt to changes like the #covid19 pandemic, according to the tribunal's unanimous decision.

In reality, the judges concluded, Zena's superior had predetermined to offer a variation of her role to another employee who was about to resign. Evidence convinced the tribunal that a decision was made to use Zena's position — a higher paying, more responsible role than that of the resigning staff member — to persuade him to remain with the company.

The judges determined that it was not a genuine redundancy situation that led to Zena's termination, but rather a scheme formulated by her bosses to use her position as a lure.

The claim that Verifone was undergoing:

"major global restructure plans across all business units, due to pandemic-related reasons and failure to meet business targets,"

was refuted by the tribunal. Verifone offered this explanation, it suggested, to mask the actual motive — their intention to retain the other #employee.

Moreover, the tribunal found the #redundancy consultation process that Verifone conducted with Zena to be "a sham," accepting email evidence which showed a pre-consultation discussion between two of Zena's superiors about evading any redundancy alternatives she might suggest.

The tribunal judged that the dismissal was unfair, stating;

"even if we had accepted that the reason was redundancy or 'some other substantial reason,' the dismissal would still be deemed unfair due to the unreasonableness of the process followed."

In a similar vein, the tribunal found Verifone's appeals process, following Zena's challenge to her redundancy, inappropriate. The person conducting the appeal did not genuinely engage with Zena's concerns.

The tribunal also deemed it dubious that Verifone allegedly kept no records of the appeal, thus regarding the company's failure to provide any documentation as "suspicious."

Due to this, the tribunal held that the appeal process could be seen as an act of victimization, given Zena's decision to undertake a protected act — the appeal itself. This accounted for ￡5,000 of the total compensation.

However, the tribunal dismissed Zena's claim that her redundancy was racially discriminatory, ruling that she failed to prove her treatment was racially motivated or that she was treated differently than a hypothetical white colleague in a similar situation.

How can Employers avoid redundancy claims by employees?

To avoid redundancy claims by employees, we at Britton and Time Solicitors advise our employer clients to ensure they are following a fair, transparent, and legally compliant redundancy process. Here are some of my steps you can take:

• Genuine Redundancy: Make sure that the redundancy is genuine. This means the job the person is doing will no longer exist, not that the person doing the job will no longer exist in the role. The latter might be construed as a disguise for unfair dismissal.
• Fair Selection: If you're making multiple redundancies, have a fair and objective process for selecting which employees will be made redundant. Commonly used criteria can include skills, qualifications, attendance, and disciplinary records. Avoid selecting employees for redundancy based on discriminatory factors such as age, race, gender, disability, pregnancy, or religion.
• Consultation: Consult with employees (and their representatives, if applicable) as soon as possible about the potential redundancies. This includes explaining why the redundancies are necessary, discussing how many people will be affected, and considering alternatives to redundancy. This consultation should be meaningful, allowing employees the opportunity to suggest alternatives to redundancy.
• Consider Alternatives: Actively consider alternatives to redundancy. This could include redeployment to other parts of the business, offering voluntary redundancy, or reducing hours.
• Provide Notice: Ensure that employees are given the appropriate notice period in line with their contract or statutory minimums.
• Redundancy Pay: Ensure that employees receive the correct redundancy pay they are entitled to. This will typically be based on their age, length of service, and weekly pay, but the details should be outlined in the employee's contract.
• Appeal Process: Have a clear and fair appeal process in place for those who have been selected for redundancy.
• Documentation: Keep clear records of all redundancy procedures, including the reasons for redundancy, the selection process, and any consultations. This can provide important evidence if a redundancy decision is later challenged.
• Legal Advice: Consult with Britton and Time Solicitors ( Paul Britton or Joseph Navas ) or your usual #employmentlawyer who will specialises in #employmentlaw to ensure all processes are legally compliant.

Following my steps can help employers avoid redundancy claims and ensure a #fair and #respectful process for employees.