Redundancy consultation is not a notification exercise. It is a process that must begin before any outcome has been decided, cover genuine alternatives to dismissal, and leave a paper trail that proves it happened properly. Employers who treat it as a formality find out the difference at tribunal. 

Under the Employment Rights Act 1996, a dismissal for redundancy is only fair if the employer has acted reasonably in all the circumstances. Reasonableness includes the consultation process. A genuine redundancy with a defective consultation is still an unfair dismissal. 

This article sets out what individual redundancy consultation requires in law, how redundancy notice periods work in practice, and where the process most commonly fails. The Valimulla case shows exactly what a tribunal concludes when it does. 

Who needs individual redundancy consultation and what triggers it 

If your business is making fewer than 20 people redundant within a 90-day period, collective consultation obligations do not apply. You are working entirely within the individual redundancy consultation framework. 

That framework comes from the Employment Rights Act 1996 and is shaped by decades of tribunal decisions. It does not prescribe a fixed number of meetings or a minimum period. It does require consultation to be genuine. Tribunals apply a reasonable employer test: would a reasonable employer in these circumstances have consulted differently? 

In most contested cases, the answer is yes. 

What the individual process requires: 

• The employee must be told they are at risk before any decision is made. 

• They must have the genuine opportunity to put forward alternatives or challenge their selection. 

• Consultation must be meaningful, not a presentation of a decision that has already been taken. 

• The employee must be allowed to be accompanied at formal meetings by a trade union representative or a workplace colleague. 

This is where most employers go wrong. They treat consultation as a notification exercise. It is not. 

Before individual redundancy consultation begins: selection and the at-risk pool 

Before the first consultation meeting, the employer must identify who is at risk. If only one person holds the role being removed, this is straightforward. If there is a pool of employees doing broadly similar work, the selection process must be fair, consistent, and defensible. 

Selection criteria must be: 

• Objective and measurable: attendance records, skills assessments, performance data. 

• Applied consistently across the pool, not retrofitted to reach a preferred outcome. 

• Free from factors that could indirectly discriminate. Length-of-service-only criteria can disadvantage younger employees or those who have taken maternity or adoption leave. 

Employers who skip the selection stage, who simply identify the person they want to remove, create unfair dismissal exposure before the consultation has even started. The selection and the consultation are both part of the same process. A fair outcome on one cannot rescue a failure on the other. 

How many meetings does individual redundancy consultation require? 

The legislation does not specify a number. But the case law is clear: one meeting is almost never sufficient. 

A genuine individual consultation process typically involves three stages: 

1. An at-risk notification meeting. The employee is told they are provisionally at risk, the business reasons are explained, and they are given adequate time to consider their response. 
2. One or more substantive consultation meetings. Alternatives are discussed, including redeployment options, different working arrangements, or other ways to avoid the redundancy. 
3. A final decision meeting. The outcome is confirmed, and the right of appeal is clearly explained. 

The gap between meetings matters. A process that moves from at-risk to dismissed inside a fortnight, with one meeting and two letters, will struggle under tribunal scrutiny. There is no statutory minimum period for individual consultation, but a reasonable time in practice means several weeks for a straightforward single-person redundancy. 

What tribunals look for is not duration but substance. Were the meetings genuine exchanges? Were the employee's suggestions considered? Is there a contemporaneous record that demonstrates this? 

The Valimulla case: what individual consultation failure looks like in practice 

Valimulla v Al-Khair Foundation [2022] is a useful reference for any employer running an individual redundancy process. 

Mr Valimulla was a teacher whose role was identified for redundancy when a school's budget fell. The employer held one consultation meeting, gave him a letter the same day confirming the redundancy, and offered a right of appeal. The tribunal found the dismissal unfair. 

The key findings: 

• The decision had been made before the meeting. The consultation was a formality, not a genuine process. 

• Redeployment options had not been genuinely explored, despite vacancies existing within the organisation. 

• The right of appeal, while offered, could not remedy the absence of genuine pre-decision consultation. 

This case is representative, not exceptional. It reflects what happens when a business treats the consultation meeting as a box to tick rather than a process with a real outcome still to be determined. The employer's intention is irrelevant if the process fails the test. 

The principle the case establishes is direct: if the decision is already made before the employee sits down, consultation has not happened. 

Redundancy notice periods: the calculation errors that cost employers most 

The redundancy notice period is where many employers make arithmetic errors that become expensive. 

Statutory minimum redundancy notice periods are based on length of service: 

• Less than one month's service: no statutory notice. 

• One month to two years' service: one week. 

• Two to twelve years' service: one week per complete year of service. 

• Twelve or more years' service: twelve weeks (the statutory maximum). 

Statutory minimums are a floor, not a ceiling. If the employment contract specifies a longer notice period, the contractual period applies. An employee on three months' contractual notice is entitled to three months, regardless of what the statute requires. 

Errors cluster in two places. First, employers apply the statutory minimum when a longer contractual period applies. Second, employers calculate service from the wrong start date, missing periods of continuous employment that include TUPE transfers or breaks that did not actually sever continuity. 

Pay during the notice period must reflect normal earnings, including regular overtime and contractual benefits. Where an employee is placed on garden leave during notice, full pay continues throughout. The statutory redundancy payment is separate from notice pay. Both are owed. 

What to put in writing and when 

Every stage of the individual redundancy process should be documented. This is not bureaucracy. It is the evidence base that either protects the business at tribunal or condemns it. 

The paper trail should include: 

• The at-risk letter confirming the employee has been notified they are provisionally at risk, the reason for the redundancy, and the date and time of the first consultation meeting. 

• Meeting notes: a contemporaneous record of what was discussed, what alternatives were raised, and what the employee said. 

• Correspondence on redeployment, confirming which vacancies were considered and why they were or were not suitable. 

• The dismissal letter confirming the reason for dismissal, the notice period, the effective date of termination, and the right of appeal. 

• The appeal outcome, in writing, with reasons. 

Employers often keep good notes of the first meeting and none thereafter. Tribunals read the gaps as evidence that nothing meaningful happened in between. If it is not written down, assume a tribunal will conclude it did not occur. 

What the process costs when it goes wrong 

An unfair dismissal compensatory award is capped at one year's gross pay or 115,115, whichever is lower, as of April 2025. The basic award follows the statutory redundancy payment calculation. Both run in addition to notice pay. 

The financial exposure is rarely the whole story. A defended tribunal claim costs between 8,000 and 15,000 in management time and professional fees, regardless of outcome. The claim itself takes twelve to eighteen months to resolve. The disruption to the management team that ran the process is real and uncosted. 

The Employment Rights Act 2025 raises the compliance bar further. Procedural fairness is under greater scrutiny. Employers running pre-Act processes against post-Act standards will find the gap uncomfortable. 

A properly run individual redundancy consultation costs a few hours of structured management time and a modest amount of professional HR support. It is not complicated. It just has to be genuine, and it has to happen before the outcome is decided. 

Frequently asked questions on individual redundancy consultation 

Do I need a redundancy policy to run individual consultation? 

No, but having one helps. A documented policy demonstrates that the business applies a consistent process. Tribunals are more sympathetic to employers who can point to a process that was followed than to those who cannot explain how they approached it. 

Can an employee refuse to attend a consultation meeting? 

Yes. Write to confirm the meeting, note the non-attendance, and offer an alternative date. If the employee consistently refuses, document the attempts and proceed. A tribunal will not find an employer at fault for a process the employee made impossible, provided the attempts are on record. 

What if there are no suitable alternative roles to offer? 

"We had no vacancies" is a legitimate position, but only if the employer actually checked. Tribunals ask for evidence of the search, not just the conclusion. What roles were open at the time? Were any considered? Why were they not suitable? The absence of redeployment can be defensible. The absence of a search cannot. 

Does the ACAS Code apply to redundancy? 

The ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures does not apply to redundancy. However, ACAS guidance on redundancy is relevant, and tribunals can take it into account when assessing whether an employer acted reasonably. 

What is a protective award and does it apply here? 

A protective award is a collective consultation penalty, worth up to 90 days' gross pay per affected employee, that applies when an employer fails collective consultation obligations under TULRCA. It does not apply to individual redundancy. However, failing the individual process exposes the employer to unfair dismissal claims and potentially to wrongful dismissal claims where notice has been miscalculated. 

Get the individual redundancy process right first time 

The HR Doctor works with UK SMEs to build the documentation, process, and management capability to run redundancy procedures that are legally sound and practically manageable. Before a situation is live, and during it, when support is needed most. 

Book a free 30-minute discovery call to talk through your situation.