Employment Tribunal: Lidl Consultant Wins Unfair Redundancy Case

Wayne Norman, who worked for the supermarket chain, Lidl, in Doncaster overseeing the construction and refurbishment of regional stores was made redundant in March 2023. At the time, he was 63 years old and had been employed by Lidl for nearly 23 years; having overseen approximately 77 construction projects, the tribunal in Sheffield heard.

Mr Norman was informed of proposed redundancies in January 2023 and later discovered that he was one of three construction consultants at risk, with only one role available following a restructure. The other two consultants were both in their 30s.

After learning that one of the younger colleagues had been successful in retaining the position, Mr Norman’s line manager, Liam Schofield, told him he had been "marked down for not having 'relevant construction qualifications' in that you do not have a construction degree", the tribunal was told.

Mr Norman argued that individuals in their 60s were "less likely" to hold a degree than those in their 30s. The tribunal accepted this point and concluded that including possession of a degree or construction qualification as part of the redundancy selection criteria constituted indirect age discrimination.

Employment Judge Neil Maidment, in a written judgement, stated that Mr Norman felt "discredited" for lacking a degree and "punished" due to his upbringing on a Welsh council estate, which had denied him the opportunity to attend university.

The tribunal found Mr Schofield’s evidence regarding the importance of qualifications in the redundancy process was not "wholly consistent". It also ruled that the "failure to conduct a reasonable process of consultation" was sufficient to render the dismissal unfair. Although Lidl had devised a "potentially fair" scoring and selection method, the tribunal found it was not "fairly and reasonably" applied in Mr Norman’s case.

Judge Maidment noted the psychological toll the redundancy had taken on Mr Norman, stating he had experienced "clear psychological damage" and, at one point, suicidal ideation.

However, Mr Norman’s claim of direct age discrimination was unsuccessful, with the tribunal accepting that his selection for redundancy had been based on an assessment of his "abilities unrelated to age". His further complaint of age-related harassment also failed.

The compensation awarded for unfair dismissal was reduced by 50% to reflect the tribunal’s view that there was a chance Mr Norman may have been fairly dismissed in any case.

Call a specialist employment lawyer  

Magara Law is an employment law firm with offices in Bicester, Banbury, Reading, and Paddington, London, and serves clients nationwide. 

For more information or to contact our employment law team at Magara Law, call 01869 325 883 or email roy@magaralaw.co.uk.