Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> Boyce v Redsky Group Ltd [2009] NIIT 127_09IT (12 June 2009)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2009/127_09.html
Cite as: [2009] NIIT 127_09IT, [2009] NIIT 127_9IT
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS
CASE REF: 127/09
CLAIMANT: Stephen James Boyce
RESPONDENT: Redsky Group Ltd
DECISION
The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that the claimant was not unfairly dismissed, by reason of unfair selection for redundancy.
Constitution of Tribunal:
Chairman: Mr D Buchanan
Members: Miss F Graham
Mrs T Cregan
Appearances:
The claimant, Mr Boyce, in person.
The respondent was represented by Ms P Grant, of its Human Resources Department.
By a claim presented to the tribunal on 16 December 2008 the claimant, Mr Boyce, alleged that he had been unfairly selected for redundancy by the respondent company. This was denied by the latter. In order to determine the matter we heard evidence from Mr Boyce, and from Mr Robert Fyfe and Ms Grant, Operations Manager and Human Resources Adviser respectively with the respondent company. We also had regard to documentary evidence submitted by the parties.
We find the facts set out in the succeeding paragraphs proved to our satisfaction on the balance of probabilities.
|
2. |
(i) |
The claimant was employed as the Mechanical Contracts Department Business Manager of the respondent company until his dismissal from that post on 28 November 2008. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(ii) |
We are satisfied that for some time before that date there had been a diminution in the business of the respondent company. This downturn in work had been discussed at a meeting on 1 April 2008 and although the claimant in his claim form questions his redundancy, he made reference in his cross-examination of Mr Fyfe to ‘the economic climate starting to take effect’ in 2008. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(iii) |
Another departmental manager was made redundant around the same time, and presently a single manager runs the two departments previously covered by Mr Boyce and the colleague made redundant. Apprentices were not taken on at the end of their apprenticeship, and another member of staff who resigned was not replaced. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(iv) |
We are therefore satisfied that there was a genuine redundancy situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
(i) |
We are further satisfied that the respondent company complied with the statutory dismissal procedure set out in Schedule 1 of the Employment (Northern Ireland) Order 2003. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(ii) |
Apart from the minimal statutory procedures required, we are satisfied that the respondent company acted fairly in all the circumstances of the case. It considered four persons for redundancy, and the selection criteria were transparent and fair. The respondent company consulted with the claimant and gave him reasonable warning of the impending redundancy. At that time he did not dispute that there was a redundancy situation.
It also made reasonable efforts to find him employment within the firm. He was offered alternative employment as a Mechanical Maintenance Manager. This would have entailed a drop in salary from £35,000 to £25,000. The claimant refused this offer of alternative employment, and at a meeting where alternative employment was discussed, he did not suggest any other suitable alternative work. |
4. We are satisfied that the claimant was dismissed for redundancy, and that that decision was fair, both substantively and procedurally. We dismiss his claim.
Chairman:
Date and place of hearing: 29 May 2009, Belfast
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: