Search
Close this search box.

Failure to redeploy does not necessarily make capability dismissal unfair

The EAT confirms there is not necessarily an obligation upon an employer who dismisses an employee on capability grounds to offer employment in another position, but each case depends on its own circumstances.
UK

In Awojobi (A) v London Borough of Lewisham, following concerns about Awojobi’s (‘A’) performance, an ‘improvement’ action plan was put in place but was unsuccessful. ‘A’ was dismissed for incapability as no further training could be identified and redeployment was not a viable option because she did not possess the skills required for other Council posts. An ET found the dismissal to be fair; a fair procedure had been followed, ‘A’ was placing additional burdens upon the service and fellow employees and redeployment was not feasible because it would simply be pushing the problem elsewhere.  ‘A’ appealed arguing that as a matter of principle an employer should consider redeployment prior to making a decision to dismiss on capability grounds.

The EAT rejected the appeal. There is no principle of law that an employer will be acting unreasonably if an employee is not given the opportunity of alternative employment in a less demanding role. The legal position is that set out in Bevan Harris Ltd v Gair [1981] IRLR 520, i.e. there is not necessarily an obligation upon every employer who dismisses an employee on the grounds of capability to offer him or her employment in another position; however, every case must depend upon its own circumstances. Given the circumstances in this case, the ET did not err in the way it approached the question of redeployment.

Note the phrase ‘there is not necessarily an obligation’ to redeploy in capability cases; so, while it was not reasonable to redeploy in this case, in different circumstances, a failure to do so may make a dismissal unfair.


This update provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Click on the links to access full details. If no link is provided, contact us for more information.  Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, SM&B cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.

Read more

Latest News

Read More

A Four-Day Working Week in the Construction Industry?

29 March 2024

Newsletter

Receive the latest HR news and strategic content

Please note, as per the GDPR Legislation, we need to ensure you are ‘Opted In’ to receive updates from ‘theHRDIRECTOR’. We will NEVER sell, rent, share or give away your data to third parties. We only use it to send information about our products and updates within the HR space To see our Privacy Policy – click here

Latest HR Jobs

University of Warwick – WMGSalary: £23,144 to £25,138 per annum This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and

The Open University – People ServicesSalary: £57,696 to £64,914 + up to £8,000 per annum MRP supplement* This provides summary information and comment on the

Cardiff UniversitySalary: Competitive This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information

University of Oxford – Oxford Department of International DevelopmentSalary: £28,759 to £33,966 (Grade 5) This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered.

Read the latest digital issue of theHRDIRECTOR for FREE

Read the latest digital issue of theHRDIRECTOR for FREE