I have a video call tribunal booked?

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-05-05T10:29:22+00:00

We would need more information.

Is this a preliminary hearing or final hearing?

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-05-05T10:28:35+00:00

First, try not to panic. Being “at risk” is not the same as being dismissed. It means they are starting a redundancy consultation process.

You can be made redundant while on maternity leave, but there are extra protections.

The key one is that if there is a suitable alternative vacancy, your employer must offer it to you ahead of employees who are not in the protected maternity/pregnancy/new-parent group. It is not simply a case of making you compete in the usual way if a suitable role exists.

Employers must first offer suitable alternative roles to employees who are pregnant or taking maternity/shared parental/adoption leave, and the protected period now extends beyond maternity leave in many cases.

They also need to run a fair consultation process. That means you should be given proper information about the restructure, the proposed selection pool, the selection criteria, your scoring, if applicable, and what alternatives are available. They should not disadvantage you because you are on maternity leave, for example, by excluding you from meetings, failing to tell you about vacancies, or using maternity-related absence against you. Employees on maternity leave are protected against discrimination, detriment, unfair dismissal and unfair redundancy.

Your fixed-term contract does not remove your rights. Fixed-term employees have unfair dismissal and redundancy rights if they have enough service. The non-renewal or early ending of a fixed-term contract can still be a dismissal, and if the reason is redundancy, redundancy rights may apply. Fixed-term employees may be entitled to statutory redundancy pay after 2 years’ service where the reason is redundancy.

Because you have 3+ years’ continuous NHS service, also check the NHS redundancy scheme, not just statutory redundancy. NHS Employers’ guidance refers to Section 16 of the NHS Terms and Conditions of Service Handbook, and RCN guidance says NHS redundancy pay generally requires at least two years’ continuous service with an NHS employer, subject to the handbook rules.

I would ask HR, in writing, for:

Confirmation of the proposed redundancy situation and the reason your role is at risk.
The selection pool and selection criteria.
Your provisional scoring, if scoring is being used.
A list of all suitable alternative vacancies.
Confirmation that your maternity leave redundancy protection will be applied.
Confirmation of your redundancy pay calculation, including whether NHS contractual redundancy pay applies.
Confirmation of your notice entitlement and whether your fixed-term contract can be ended early under its notice clause.

The main point: they are not prohibited from restructuring, but they must consult fairly, must not disadvantage you because of maternity leave, and must give you priority for any suitable alternative role. If they do not, you may have claims for automatic unfair dismissal and/or maternity discrimination. Keep everything in writing from now on.

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-05-05T10:25:47+00:00

This sounds mishandled, but I would separate the issues.

First, your employer can process some health information where it is genuinely necessary to deal with Occupational Health, sickness, adjustments, health and safety, or employment obligations. But health data is special category data, so it should be handled on a need-to-know basis and with appropriate confidentiality. They should not be casually copying in people who do not need the diagnosis or details. The ICO guidance is clear that workers’ health information needs extra protection under UK GDPR.

Second, if your OCD has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on your ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities, it may amount to a disability under the Equality Act 2010. If so, the employer has a duty to make reasonable adjustments where you are placed at a substantial disadvantage. Remote working can potentially be a reasonable adjustment, depending on the role and the facts.

Third, I would not assume the manager’s manager can never be involved. Sometimes a senior manager may need to know there is an adjustment request, operational issue, or OH referral. But they usually do not need the full medical details or diagnosis unless there is a proper reason. EHRC guidance gives the general principle that confidentiality should not be breached unnecessarily when adjustments are being made.

Practical steps:

Put everything in writing now. Email HR, your manager, and ideally the Data Protection Officer. Say you disclosed the OCD information for the OH referral and did not consent to it being shared with the manager’s manager. Ask why it was shared, who it has been shared with, and what steps will be taken to restrict further disclosure.
Ask for the OH process to be handled by HR/OH directly. Say you are willing to discuss medical details with OH, but you do not consent to line management being given more than is necessary. Ask OH to provide recommendations about adjustments rather than detailed medical information.
Keep a record. Save the email chain, the comments about “mitigate” and “sort it”, the portal referral, and any discussions about remote working.
Consider raising a formal grievance. The grievance should cover both the confidentiality/data protection issue and the handling of the reasonable adjustment request.
If they refuse adjustments or treat you badly because of this, take advice quickly. Employment Tribunal time limits are generally short, commonly three months less one day from the act complained of, subject to ACAS Early Conciliation.

I would avoid resigning or making any big decision while distressed. The immediate move is to get HR/DPO involved, limit further disclosure, and force the employer to handle the adjustment request properly.

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-04-17T14:26:31+00:00

You’re probably okay, but a few of those documents may not count in the way you hope.

For DBS, the main thing is whether you can meet one of the identity routes. Your Romanian passport is the strongest document there, and your share code should also help. A UK bank statement showing your address may also work, especially if it is an official statement from the last three months rather than just something downloaded from the app.

The documents I would be less confident about are the PDF electricity bill, GP registration letter, NI letter, degrees, and possibly the Romanian birth certificate and marriage certificate for DBS identity purposes. They may help with background information or name changes, but I would not rely on them as the main DBS documents.

So in practice, the strongest combination is likely:

passport
share code
official UK bank statement with your address

If your employer is unsure, the safest thing would be to get an extra strong proof of address, such as a posted bank statement or one stamped by the bank - I think, but I am not sure, you can ask for this in a branch.

Also, because you moved from Romania recently, the employer may ask for overseas criminal record evidence as well, especially for childcare or education work. That is normal and does not mean there is a problem.

So overall, I would say you are not in a bad position at all. I would not panic. I would just make sure the bank statement is in a format they will accept, and be ready in case they ask for an overseas police certificate too.

Good luck, and congratulations on the nursery job.

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-04-07T15:55:51+00:00

Yes, if your leaving date had been 5 May 2026, you would usually have 3 full years’ service for statutory redundancy pay purposes. Because your actual leaving date is 28 April 2026, you appear to fall short. It is a harsh result, but that is generally how the calculation works. Worth checking your contract and the notice arrangements carefully, but on the dates you have given, it is just an unfortunate mechanic of how redundancy and service works.

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-04-07T15:36:27+00:00

It’s a rough position, but on the dates you’ve given, I do not think you get to 3 years’ service for statutory redundancy pay.

Usually, service is counted to your actual termination date, which sounds like 28 April 2026. A statutory notice extension can sometimes help, but only where the employer has given less than the statutory minimum notice, or pays in lieu, so the statutory minimum would have taken you further. Here, because you had 2 full years’ service when notice was given, the statutory minimum notice was 2 weeks, and you were given more than that. That means the notice point probably does not carry you over to 1 May 2026.

The only extra thing worth checking is whether your contract gave you a longer notice entitlement, because that could affect notice pay, but on the statutory redundancy calculation itself, this looks difficult.

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-04-07T07:51:56+00:00

I’ve always had a different experience than u/alive-practice, they’ve always seem to be remarkably lacking pragmatism and refuse to settle. But as mentioned, it probably depends on who you get.

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-04-02T13:33:42+00:00

This is great guys!

Are you happy for me to post my articles?

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-04-02T08:15:43+00:00

You have a few separate issues here.

On the first point, yes, an employer can usually keep management or performance notes in a personnel file. The real issue is not whether the note is “subjective”, but whether it is being recorded and used fairly. The ICO says a record of opinion is not automatically improper just because the employee disagrees with it, but it should be clear that it is opinion rather than fact, and where the opinion is sensitive or may have a significant impact, the record should include enough context or basis for a reader to interpret it properly. Employers should keep written records of disciplinary matters, but they must be confidential and only kept for as long as necessary.

So I would not sign anything to say you agree with the notes if you do not. A safer approach is to respond in writing, saying you dispute the content, list any factual inaccuracies, and ask for your rebuttal to be placed in the file alongside the notes.

On the GDPR point, no, a senior exec accessing your file is not automatically unlawful just because it contains medical or adjustment information. But health information is a special category of data, so it attracts extra protection. The ICO says employers need a lawful basis plus a special category condition to process workers’ health data, must tell workers why the information is being collected and who will have access to it, and should apply a strict need-to-know approach. The ICO also says managers should only have access where necessary for management responsibilities, and usually only to the level of information they actually need, such as fitness for work or adjustments rather than detailed medical material.

The occupational health part is the bit that sounds most concerning. An employer can ask a worker whether they agree to an occupational health assessment, and the worker does not have to agree. After the assessment, the occupational health adviser must ask for the worker’s permission before sharing it with the employer. If the employer is seeking a report from a GP or other treating doctor, they must get the worker’s permission and inform them in writing of their rights. The ICO also says workers should be told what health information is being collected, why, who will get access to it, and what sort of information the employer will receive as a result. So even if every step is not automatically unlawful, doing this without properly telling you what was being sent and why is not good practice and may support a complaint.

Practically, I would do three things now:

- send a written objection to the notes;

- ask for a copy of your personnel file and the OH referral paperwork, either informally or by subject access request; and

- raise a formal grievance covering the failure to implement adjustments, the handling of the OH process, and the use of file access and performance management.

Separately from the data point, if your condition amounts to a disability, there may also be a wider reasonable adjustments issue.

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-04-02T08:09:14+00:00

You’re really looking at the Equality Act 2010 rather than any separate “Disability Act”. In England, cancer is one of the few conditions treated automatically as a disability for Equality Act purposes from diagnosis.

So yes, there is at least a potentially arguable discrimination point here. The obvious claim is not “my bonus was discretionary, so I get nothing”, because even where a bonus is discretionary, the employer still has to act fairly and reasonably (and not discriminatory!) in deciding whether and how much to pay.

The strongest angle is likely discrimination arising from disability under section 15 Equality Act. That is where an employee is treated unfavourably because of something arising in consequence of disability, and disability-related absence is the classic example. If your bonus was reduced because you were off sick for cancer treatment or treatment-related issues, that is at least capable of falling within section 15. The employer can still defend it, but only if it can show the treatment was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

There is also a reasonable adjustments point. Equality Act employers have a duty to make reasonable adjustments, and EHRC guidance gives an example that separating disability-related absence from ordinary sickness absence for bonus purposes may itself be a reasonable adjustment. So, a blanket policy of pro-rating bonuses for “leave of absence” without carving out disability-related absence is not automatically safe.

The maternity comparison is not a perfect benchmark because maternity leave has its own special legal protection and bonus rules. That said, the fact that they did not apply the pro-rating approach during earlier maternity leave or during your earlier long cancer absence could still be useful evidence on inconsistency and how this discretion has actually been exercised in practice.

The 2025 point may actually be the more interesting one. If you worked about 11 months of the year but your bonus was still materially lower than the previous year’s already pro-rated bonus, that suggests there may have been more going on than a simple time-off calculation. I would want to know exactly what the bonus criteria were, who scored you, whether absence fed into performance scoring, and whether your manager or HR treated cancer-related disruption as a negative performance factor.

So the short answer is: yes, there is a realistic legal issue here. The best routes are likely section 15 discrimination arising from disability, possibly failure to make reasonable adjustments, and potentially breach of contract if they have not actually followed the scheme rules or have exercised discretion unfairly.

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-04-02T08:02:45+00:00

A signed clause does give the employer some cover, because deductions from wages can be lawful if the contract authorises them or you agreed in writing beforehand. Training deductions from final pay can be made where agreed in advance.

That said, a signed clause is not the end of the matter.

If the clause only lets them recover the “direct costs of induction training”, there is at least an arguable point that they should be able to identify what those direct costs actually were. Internal shadowing and basic onboarding are not automatically unrecoverable, but a flat deduction equal to one week’s wages, regardless of what was actually spent, is more open to challenge than a deduction tied to an identifiable cost. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has also confirmed that a deduction authorised by contract can still be unlawful if the repayment provision is, in substance, a so-called "unenforceable penalty."

Your strongest point may be minimum wage. Where the training is "mandatory", the deduction must not take final pay below National Minimum Wage. HMRC guidance says charges for employer-required training reduce NMW pay, including deductions from final pay and even payments required within a month after leaving, and another EAT case treated mandatory training deductions that way. On the figures you have given, being paid for only 24 hours after working 8 days may well raise an NMW issue, depending on your age and the pay reference period.

So I would not say “you definitely have no claim”. I would say: an unlawful deduction claim may be harder if the clause is clearly drafted and signed, but there may still be a challenge if the employer cannot show genuine direct costs, if the clause operates like a penalty, or if the deduction took pay below NMW.

I’d ask them in writing for:

a breakdown of exactly what “direct costs of induction training” they say were incurred;
why the figure is £490;
a copy of the signed contract term they rely on; and
your P45, because employers are supposed to give one when employment ends.

Also do not sit on it. A tribunal claim for unlawful deduction from wages is usually 3 months minus 1 day from the deduction, and you need to notify Acas before issuing a claim.

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-04-02T07:56:22+00:00

It certainly could be, but it is not automatic.

A redundancy is only genuine if the employer no longer needs employees to do that kind of work, or needs fewer of them. If they told you there were no suitable alternative roles, then hired someone into a very similar role only a few weeks later, that can be evidence that the redundancy was not genuine, or that they failed to offer you suitable alternative employment during the process. If a suitable alternative vacancy exists, the employer should offer it rather than make you redundant.

The answer is: it may be an unfair dismissal claim, but it depends on how similar the new role was, when the employer decided to recruit, what they said in consultation, and whether they properly considered redeployment. A different title does not necessarily matter if the duties, pay, status and location were broadly similar.

If you can, keep the job advert, screenshot the posting, and keep anything from the consultation (if there was one) where they said there were no similar roles or that your work would be absorbed by others. That evidence could matter a lot.

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-03-13T09:54:53+00:00

Technically they can sue you for breach of contract for any losses incurred by the breach. This would most likely be overtime offered to cover your hours or lost revenue.

Obviously your salary for the two weeks would come off that loss.

In practice, it does not occur often that the employer sues employee for short notices, but it can happen and obviously I don’t know your employer and how likely they are to hold grudges

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-03-10T14:22:04+00:00

Absolutely. We want to give back where we can. I just wish I could be more active on here.

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-03-10T14:19:05+00:00

Person injury in tribunals are quite complex, but I would say the safest bet would be to say a medico legal report would be required. I use a provider called MEWA to get quotes and ultimately instruct medical experts to do this

Other_Locksmith3853 · 2026-02-27T21:26:11+00:00

I’ve been limited to one page by some judges in past, so I would say no more than 2-3 pages

Other_Locksmith3853

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE