Get Answers
What unfair redundancy selection looks like
Redundancy selection should be based on fair, objective criteria. If you are being chosen for redundancy, the employer should be able to explain why your role is at risk and how the selection process was carried out.
Signs of unfair selection often appear when the process seems inconsistent, rushed, or targeted at one particular person. If the reasons given do not match the evidence, or other employees in similar roles are treated differently, that may be a warning sign.
Missing or unclear selection criteria
A fair redundancy process usually uses clear criteria such as skills, qualifications, attendance, performance, or disciplinary record. These criteria should be shared with staff and applied consistently across the selection pool.
If your employer refuses to explain the criteria, changes them part way through, or uses vague terms like “fit” or “attitude” without evidence, the selection may be unfair. A lack of transparency can make it harder to check whether the decision was genuine.
Being singled out without good reason
One common sign of unfair redundancy selection is being placed in the pool without a proper reason. If your job is similar to colleagues’ roles, but only you are selected, your employer should be able to justify that decision.
You may also have concerns if you are selected after raising a complaint, asking questions, or taking protected leave. Selection because of pregnancy, maternity leave, disability, whistleblowing, trade union activity, or asserting employment rights may be unlawful.
Poor consultation and lack of evidence
Employers should consult with employees before final decisions are made. If you are not given a chance to discuss the selection pool, challenge scores, or suggest alternatives, the process may be unfair.
It is also a concern if scoring appears made up or lacks documentary evidence. For example, if your performance is marked down but there are no records, appraisals, or warnings to support it, the selection may not stand up to scrutiny.
What to do if you suspect unfairness
Start by asking for the redundancy criteria, your scores, and the reasons for your selection. Keep copies of emails, meeting notes, appraisal records, and any documents you receive during the process.
If you believe the selection is unfair, raise the issue formally with your employer as soon as possible. You may also want to seek advice from an employment solicitor, trade union, or Citizens Advice, especially if you think the redundancy could be discriminatory or automatically unfair.
Frequently Asked Questions
Unfair redundancy selection signs are indicators that an employer may have used biased, inconsistent, discriminatory, or predetermined criteria when deciding who should be made redundant.
Common unfair redundancy selection signs include inconsistent scoring, hidden criteria, selecting only older workers or disabled workers, targeting people on maternity leave, and ignoring attendance or performance history without a clear reason.
Unfair redundancy selection signs can appear where scores are changed without explanation, managers score people they do not know, criteria are vague, or the same evidence is treated differently for different employees.
Yes. If unfair redundancy selection signs show that older workers were singled out, scored lower without evidence, or disproportionately selected, age discrimination may be involved.
Yes. Unfair redundancy selection signs may include penalising disability-related absence, failing to make reasonable adjustments, or treating a disabled employee less favourably during selection.
Yes. Unfair redundancy selection signs may include selecting someone because they are pregnant, on maternity leave, or have recently returned from maternity leave, which may be unlawful.
Unfair redundancy selection signs in attendance criteria include counting disability-related absence, maternity-related absence, or protected leave against an employee, or applying attendance rules inconsistently.
Unfair redundancy selection signs in performance criteria include using unrecorded concerns, relying on recent clashes, ignoring past appraisals, or applying performance standards more harshly to certain employees.
Unfair redundancy selection signs in consultation meetings include refusing to discuss the selection method, not allowing employees to challenge scores, making decisions before consultation begins, or ignoring alternative roles.
Yes. If the employer will not share the redundancy selection matrix, refuses to explain criteria, or cannot show how scores were calculated, those may be unfair redundancy selection signs.
Yes. Unfair redundancy selection signs can include personal bias, favouritism, or hostility toward certain employees affecting who is selected for redundancy.
Unfair redundancy selection signs may be present if one team is targeted without a genuine business reason, if the pool was set too narrowly, or if similar roles in other teams were excluded without explanation.
A very small pool can be an unfair redundancy selection sign if it was designed to include only one person or a preferred group, rather than everyone doing similar work.
Yes. Introducing new criteria at the end of the process, or changing the rules after seeing who might be selected, can be an unfair redundancy selection sign.
If the employer fails to consider suitable alternative roles, retraining, reduced hours, or voluntary redundancy, that may be one of the unfair redundancy selection signs.
Yes. If an employer relies on inaccurate records, outdated appraisals, or unsupported complaints without checking them, that may be an unfair redundancy selection sign.
Selecting only employees who complained, reported wrongdoing, or challenged management may suggest retaliation and can be one of the unfair redundancy selection signs.
Yes. Unfair redundancy selection signs may include scoring part-time workers lower because of their hours, excluding them from the pool unfairly, or treating reduced availability as a fault without reason.
Look for contradictions between notes and scores, missing documentation, unexplained score changes, inconsistent comments, and records that suggest the decision was made before consultation.
Unfair redundancy selection signs are serious enough to challenge if they show bias, discrimination, inconsistent application of criteria, or a lack of genuine consultation. A clear pattern of unfairness is often the strongest indicator.
Ergsy Search Results
This website offers general information and is not a substitute for professional advice.
Always seek guidance from qualified professionals.
If you have any medical concerns or need urgent help, contact a healthcare professional or emergency services immediately.
Some of this content was generated with AI assistance. We've done our best to keep it accurate, helpful, and human-friendly.
- Ergsy carefully checks the information in the videos we provide here.
- Videos shown by Youtube after a video has completed, have NOT been reviewed by ERGSY.
- To view, click the arrow in centre of video.
- Most of the videos you find here will have subtitles and/or closed captions available.
- You may need to turn these on, and choose your preferred language.
- Go to the video you'd like to watch.
- If closed captions (CC) are available, settings will be visible on the bottom right of the video player.
- To turn on Captions, click settings.
- To turn off Captions, click settings again.