by Tara Kelly, Solicitor, AOC Solicitors
In Mark Langham v JMK Group (ADJ-00047192) the Workplace Relations Commission (“WRC”) awarded €125,000 in compensation under the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977-2015 (the “Acts”) after finding that the Complainant was unfairly dismissed under the “cloak” of redundancy.
The Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent on 16th May 2022 as Head of Operations Ireland. He was dismissed by reason of redundancy just over a year later on 16th June 2023. The Complainant was informed that “last in first out” (“LIFO”) was the reason for his role’s selection for redundancy (the sole proposed redundancy) and following a consultation period his role was made redundant.
The Respondent is a family-owned group which operates hotels in the UK and Ireland. The Respondent submitted to the WRC that they reviewed senior management roles in the business in or around November 2022 and decided that the Head of Operations role in Ireland was surplus to requirements. This role was responsible for managing the operational department in Ireland and had a number of direct reports. Ms Kajani, Director, gave evidence to the WRC on the business rationale for cost saving measures in the Irish business which led to the Complainant’s redundancy. The Complainant’s salary of €160,000 was taken into consideration along with refinancing options and outsourcing of housekeeping. The Respondent submitted that the redundancy was genuine, and the role remains vacant. They also submitted that they engaged the services of an external HR consultancy firm to ensure impartiality in relation to the procedures they followed.
The Complainant gave evidence that the business had a turnover of approximately €50.5 million and was doing very well. He submitted that a number of employees started after he did in the business including a Finance Director for UK and Ireland and a coffee shop manager. The Complainant highlighted that he challenged a number of points in the business rationale for redundancy during the consultation process and felt he was met with “weak responses”. The Complainant described feeling sick with the outcome, especially as he had relocated to Ireland from London for the role.
Decision: The Adjudicator, John Harraghy, determined that the Complainant was unfairly dismissed and awarded €125,000 as compensation considering the Complainant’s loss of earnings and ongoing loss on a lower salary in his new role. The Adjudicator referred to the Unfair Dismissal Acts which provide that the burden of proof is on the employer to show that the dismissal resulted wholly or mainly from the redundancy of the employee. Under the Acts the WRC can also have regard to the reasonableness or otherwise of the conduct of the employer in relation to the dismissal. Even if there is a genuine redundancy situation, the Adjudicator noted there is on onus on the employer to show the selection of the individual was reasonable and that the selection process was fair and transparent.
In particular, the Adjudicator noted that no evidence was adduced to substantiate the assertion that the financial position of the Respondent was such that it justified the redundancy of the Head of Operations Ireland role. He commented that it seemed implausible that the Respondent would decide the Complainant’s salary was a burden on the business given the Complainant’s recent role in the renewal of a significant contract and in light of expansion plans for the Irish part of the business. The timing of the redundancy was also questioned by the Adjudicator, as he found it difficult to reconcile how the role was specifically selected for review less than 6 months since the Complainant took up the role. The Adjudicator noted “contradictory evidence” from the Respondent regarding LIFO being the criteria used for selecting the Complainant’s role for redundancy and found there was a failure to fully consider the Complainant’s suggestions for possible alternatives to redundancy. The Adjudicator also highlighted the “marked absence” of the minutes of the senior management meeting where the decision to make the role redundant was made. In concluding remarks, the Adjudicator stated that he found the redundancy was used “as a cloak” to dismiss the Complainant.
Takeaway for Employers: This decision highlights the evidential burden on employers in unfair dismissal cases, and in particular the requirement for written evidence in respect of the justification for a decision to dismiss an employee. If an employer is relying on one of the specified grounds for dismissal which are deemed not to be unfair under the Acts, for example redundancy, they must be able to demonstrate the dismissal resulted wholly or mainly from that matter. In redundancy cases, the WRC will peel back the layers to determine whether a genuine redundancy situation existed and whether fair procedures were followed. A standalone redundancy will always bear more scrutiny, as the WRC Adjudicator will need to be satisfied that the individual was not unfairly targeted for dismissal and the onus will be on the employer to produce contemporaneous documentary evidence to the WRC substantiating the reason for the redundancy. An interesting element of this case is that the Adjudicator specifically noted the absence of minutes from the senior management meeting where the decision was made to make the role redundant, which demonstrates the extent of documentary evidence the employer may be required to produce at a WRC hearing.
Link – https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2025/march/adj-00047192.html
About the author
Tara Kelly is a newly qualified solicitor within AOC Solicitors since 1st April 2025. During her legal training Tara worked on a wide variety of cases for both employer and employee clients across a range of industries including finance, technology, transport, real estate, education and healthcare. These cases included complaints under unfair dismissal, employment equality, payment of wages and organisation of working time legislation. Prior to joining the firm, Tara worked in the HR field for 6 years and completed a M.Sc. in Human Resource Management at Dublin City University.
