Tribunal criticises Vets Now redundancy consultation

A major out-of-hours care provider failed to follow appropriate redundancy procedures when it reformed its district management structures, an employment tribunal has ruled.

Case documents have also indicated that several other similar claims were lodged against Vets Now over the process in which dozens of roles were jeopardised last year.

The company said it was “committed to following due process”, but couldn’t comment further because of the continuing proceedings.

The ruling, which has now been made public, relates to the case of a single claimant who alleged the company had dismissed her unfairly and failed to properly consult.

Collective consultation

The latter claim relates to an area of labour relations law which requires employers to carry out a collective consultation process if more than 20 redundancies are being proposed within a single establishment.

The ruling said lawyers for Vets Now had conceded, “albeit at a late stage”, that the company had proposed to dismiss more than 20 staff at the same time through the process.

But they argued that each of the district bodies affected by the changes had their own internal management structures and delegated autonomy for daily functions, meaning they should not be considered as a whole.

However, the tribunal concluded there was “insufficient autonomy, delineation and independence within the districts for them to have been properly regarded as separate establishments within the meaning of the legislation”.

Tribunal process

A decision on the unfair dismissal claim is still to be made following the hearing, which took place in Bristol last month.

But the document said six other individuals had brought similar claims against the company, though most of those cases are not due to be heard until next year.

In response to the ruling, published on 12 August, a Vets Now spokesperson said: “We take all employee-related matters seriously and are committed to following due process.

“We respect the confidentiality and integrity of the tribunal process and, at this stage, it would be inappropriate to comment further on the specifics of the case as it is ongoing.”

The company also stressed it did take legal advice at the time and a consultation process did take place.