Employee wins discrimination claim after botched redundancy

Employee wins discrimination claim after botched redundancy

A part-time employee with mental health issues has won her claims for disability discrimination, indirect sex discrimination and part-time worker discrimination after she was selected for redundancy. Where did the employer go wrong in this case?

Mental health condition

Ms Neill (N) worked for Dermalogica UK Ltd in a team of four in its facilities department. She worked part-time two days a week while managing a mental health condition which included severe depression, anxiety and panic attacks. Her employer was aware of her mental health issues.

Selection for redundancy

On one of N's non-working days, she was called to a Microsoft Teams meeting simply titled "Catch Up?". At this brief virtual meeting, N was told that the facilities department needed far less of a headcount and so her role had been selected for redundancy. She was given no prior warning of this and no opportunity to be accompanied or supported by colleagues. Instead, she was left to cope with the news alone at home. This significantly worsened her already fragile mental health and plunged her into a state of despair.

At a subsequent consultation meeting, N was advised she had been selected for redundancy because she was half a head. She refused to participate further in the "sham" process and raised a grievance. Another employee then left the facilities department, and so N wasn't made redundant. She nonetheless brought claims in relation to the redundancy process for a failure to make reasonable adjustments for her disability, indirect sex discrimination and part-time worker discrimination under the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000.

Successful discrimination claims

The employment tribunal accepted that N was disabled and upheld her claim for a failure to make reasonable adjustments. She had been placed at a substantial disadvantage compared to someone without her disability in that she suffered a significant mental health impact due to being at home and unsupported following the Teams call.

Tip. Reasonable adjustments in this case could have included: (1) the meeting taking place in the office on one of N's working days when she could have then sought support from colleagues; (2) N being given more notice of the meeting and prior warning of the purpose of it; and (3) N being given the chance to be accompanied at it. These are all adjustments that it would have been easy to make.

N also succeeded in her indirect sex discrimination and part-time worker discrimination claims. She was selected for redundancy because she was part time. More women work part time than men and so selecting a part timer to meet half a headcount reduction puts women at a particular disadvantage when compared to men. She was additionally treated less favourably than a full-time employee when she was told she would be made redundant because she was a part timer.

Trap. If you select an employee for redundancy solely based on their part-time status (even if you only need to lose half a headcount), you're at risk of indirect sex discrimination and part-time worker discrimination claims, as this case demonstrates.

Tip. If you select from the relevant selection pool in the normal way, if a full timer is selected, you can offer them a role on reduced hours to fulfil your need to only lose half a headcount.

 The employer failed to make reasonable adjustments for the employee's mental health  in relation to the first redundancy meeting, which was sprung on her and held over  Microsoft Teams on a non-working day when she was at home alone and unsupported.  It also selected her for redundancy solely because she worked part time.