Loss of the redundancy payment under s.141 ERA 1996 where suitable alternative employment is offered and unreasonably refused. Cambridge and District Co-operative Society Ltd v Ruse.
Redundancy; suitable alternative employment; the Divisional Court held that suitability of alternative employment depends on the nature and character of the employment as a whole, not merely the salary. A headmaster offered a role in a mobile pool of supply teachers was not offered suitable alternative employment despite the same pay, because the status and nature of the work were fundamentally different.
Redundancy; suitable alternative employment; burden of proof. The NIRC held that under what is now s.141 ERA 1996 the burden of proving both (a) that an offer constitutes suitable alternative employment and (b) that the employee's refusal of the offer was unreasonable lies on the employer, not the employee.
Redundancy; suitable alternative employment; unreasonable refusal. Whether an employee has unreasonably refused an offer of suitable alternative employment (now s.141 ERA 1996) is judged from the employee's point of view, 'on the basis of the facts as they appeared, or ought reasonably to have appeared, to her at the time the decision had to be made'. It is a specific, individual assessment of that employee's reasons — not a band-of-reasonable-responses test (Devon PCT v Readman).
Redundancy; suitable alternative employment; objective suitability vs subjective reasonableness. The EAT held that suitability of alternative employment is an objective question, but the reasonableness of the employee's refusal is a subjective question to be assessed from the employee's point of view. An employee can reasonably refuse an objectively suitable offer on the basis of their personal perception of the post.
Unfair dismissal; redundancy; the tribunal should check if the alternative employment offer was suitable.
Redundancy; alternative employment; employer must make reasonable efforts to find alternative work within the group.
Redundancy; suitable alternative employment; two-stage test. The EAT confirmed the two-stage test under s.141 ERA 1996: first, whether the offer was of suitable employment (objective); second, whether the employee had sound and justifiable reasons for refusing the offer (subjective, from the employee's perspective). The burden of proving both limbs rests on the employer.
Redundancy; suitable alternative employment; subjective reasonableness; the Court of Appeal held that in assessing whether an employee unreasonably refused an offer of suitable alternative employment under s.141 ERA 1996, there is a 'strong element of subjectivity in the test'. The question is whether, from the employee's point of view on the facts as they appeared or ought reasonably to have appeared at the time, the refusal was reasonable. The 'band of reasonable responses' test from unfair dismissal does not apply.
Redundancy; suitable alternative employment; reasonable refusal; the EAT confirmed that genuinely held concerns about a change in the character of one's working environment, including loss of autonomy and status, can ground a reasonable refusal of an offer of suitable alternative employment under s.141 ERA 1996, even where the alternative role is objectively suitable.