Pick a number: redundancy pool of one was not unreasonable
An issue that comes up fairly regularly in redundancy selection is whether employers must consider all employees in similar roles or whether they can opt for a ‘pool of one’.
The claimant in Prince v Groundwork Wrexham & Flintshire was dismissed for redundancy from her senior management post as part of a restructuring, necessitated by her employer’s financial problems.
The executive director had produced a restructuring plan based on the conclusion that the employers had too many managers and insufficient staff actually delivering their services. The plan involved the reduction of four management posts to two. Four employees, including the claimant, were identified as potentially redundant and, under the proposed new structure, the claimant’s post was no longer present. The claimant produced her own document suggesting an alternative way forward but the executive director’s plan was agreed by the board and the claimant was made redundant…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Hogan Lovells briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from Hogan Lovells
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Hogan Lovells
The decision of the US Court of Appeals has raised questions about how issuers should present their disclosures on conflict minerals under Exchange Act Rule 13p-1 and Form SD.
An interesting judgment was delivered by the Honourable J Majiki on 19 November 2013 in the Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth.
Analysis from The Lawyer
As international firms question their future in these small, closely linked markets, local lawyers too are eyeing the business environment with caution
Beyond the headline infrastructure projects, UK construction work is still recovering from the clobbering it took during the slump