Hendy Group Ltd v Kennedy: A Landmark Case in Redundancy Law

The case of Hendy Group Ltd v Kennedy ([2024] EAT 106) has highlighted crucial principles surrounding redundancy and the employer's duty to consider alternative employment. It serves as an important precedent for businesses handling redundancy procedures fairly and responsibly.

Background

Daniel Kennedy, a long-serving employee of Hendy Group Ltd, faced redundancy when his training role was discontinued due to the economic downturn following the COVID-19 pandemic. While the redundancy itself was not disputed, Kennedy challenged the company's failure to properly assist him in securing another role within the organization.

Key Legal Issues

The Employment Tribunal focused on the employer’s obligation to explore alternative employment options, emphasizing that merely listing vacancies is not enough. The tribunal found that:

• Hendy Group did not actively help Kennedy find another suitable position.

  
  

• He was treated like an external candidate when applying for internal vacancies.

  
  

• His access to internal systems was removed, making job searching difficult.

  
  

• The company had multiple suitable vacancies during his notice period but failed to consider him for them.

  
  

• An HR email blocked Kennedy from applying for further roles, despite his relevant experience.

  
  

These failures ultimately led to a finding of unfair dismissal, reinforcing that redundancy must be handled fairly and responsibly.

Legal Principles Reinforced

The ruling reaffirmed several key employment law principles:

1. Employers must actively consider alternative employment—not just provide a list of vacancies.

   
   

2. The reasonableness test applies to an employer’s handling of redundancy; decisions must fall within a range of reasonable responses.

   
   

3. Procedural fairness is crucial—failure to explore alternative roles can render even a genuine redundancy unfair.

   
   

4. The Polkey Reduction doctrine applies carefully—if procedural unfairness prevents an employee from securing another role, their compensation should not be reduced.

   
   

Impact on Employment Practices

This case serves as a wake-up call for employers, reminding them that redundancy processes require more than a box-ticking approach. Companies must:

• Engage proactively with employees facing redundancy.

  
  

• Ensure internal roles are genuinely available and accessible to affected staff.

  
  

• Avoid discriminatory or obstructive practices that limit an employee's ability to secure another position.

  
  

Conclusion

The ruling in Hendy Group Ltd v Kennedy reaffirms the importance of fair redundancy procedures and the duty of employers to provide real opportunities for redeployment. Employers must take a genuine and supportive approach to redundancy—not just a formalistic one.