In this unpredictable economic climate, redundancies remain an unfortunate reality for many organisations. At the heart of a fair redundancy lies proper consultation. Yet missteps in the consultation process are one of the most common causes of unfair dismissal claims for redundancy.

So what are the common pitfalls?

  1. Failing to consult properly or early enough

One of the most common mistakes HR professionals make is treating consultation as a formality, rather than a meaningful process. Consultation must take place before final decisions are made, at a stage when there is a genuine opportunity to influence the outcome.

Where 20 or more redundancies are proposed within a 90-day period at one establishment, collective consultation obligations are triggered. This includes:

  • A minimum 30-day consultation period (or 45 days if 100+ redundancies)
  • Notification to the Secretary of State via an HR1 form

(* subject to change under the Employment Rights Bill *)

Failing to comply can result in costly protective awards and reputational damage. Even where collective consultation is not required, individual consultation is still necessary and should be substantive.

  1. Using unfair or vague selection criteria

When selecting employees for redundancy, the criteria used must be fair, transparent, and, ideally, objective. Overly subjective criteria such as ‘attitude’ or ‘team fit’ can expose employers to claims, especially if they disproportionately disadvantage those with protected characteristics.

Instead, use evidence-based measures like:

  • skills and qualifications
  • performance records
  • disciplinary history
  • attendance (with caution, to avoid any potential disability discrimination)

It’s also vital to ensure managers are trained to apply criteria consistently, and to keep clear records of both scoring and rationale.

  1. Overlooking alternatives to redundancy

One of the aims of consultation is to explore ways to avoid dismissal. HR should proactively consider – and be seen to consider – alternatives such as:

  • other roles available within the business (remember not all alternatives will be suitable alternatives)
  • voluntary redundancy
  • reduction in hours or job sharing
  • pay cuts or temporary lay-offs (where contractually permitted)

Merely stating that alternatives were considered is not enough. Proper documentation and openness to employee suggestions is essential.

  1. Inadequate documentation and record-keeping

Tribunals often rely heavily on the paper trail when determining whether a redundancy was fair. You must keep accurate records of:

  • consultation meeting notes
  • scoring matrices and how criteria were applied
  • communication with affected employees
  • consideration of alternatives

Failing to document decisions and processes properly can make even a fair process appear flawed in hindsight.

Conclusion

Redundancy is a challenging process, not just for those leaving, but also for those managing the process. Early, meaningful consultation, fair selection criteria, open-mindedness to alternatives, and solid documentation are all cornerstones of a solid redundancy process.

Handled correctly, redundancy doesn’t have to result in litigation or damaged relationships. It can instead reflect a culture of respect, transparency, and fairness -values that employees notice long after the process ends.