Employment: Unfair Dismissal - Award - Polkey Reduction

In Dockerty v FM Fabrications, Dockerty claimed▪ The ET had not considered whether a
that he had been unfairly dismissed by hisPolkey reduction should be made;
employers, FM Fabrications. The Employment▪ The ET must address a two stage
Tribunal held in favour of Dockerty and ruled thatquestion when calculating compensation for unfair
the redundancy process by which Dockerty haddismissal:
been chosen for dismissal was unfair resulting in1) Would an offer of employment have resulted
an unfair dismissal. The Employment Tribunalhad the proper procedure been followed?; and
ordered FM Fabrications to pay Dockerty2) If so, what would that employment have been
£17,997.40 in damages.and what wages would have been paid?
FM Fabrications appealed this decision to the▪ The appeal was allowed and remitted to
Employment Appeal Tribunal ("EAT") and claimedthe Employment Tribunal for a new judgment.
that the Employment Tribunal had erred in law byComment: Please contact us if you have any
not considering a Polkey reduction. If a decision isquestions about assessing compensation for an
held to be procedurally unfair, the Employmentunfair dismissal.
Tribunal will ask itself whether this failure wouldEmail: © RT COOPERS, 2006. This Briefing
have ultimately made a difference in the outcome.Note does not provide a comprehensive or
If not, then compensation will be limited to thecomplete statement of the law relating to the
period it would have taken for a properissues discussed nor does it constitute legal advice.
procedure to take place before a fair dismissalIt is intended only to highlight general issues.
could have occurred. This is commonly known asSpecialist legal advice should always be sought in
a Polkey reduction.relation to particular circumstances.
The EAT ruled that: