For HR professionals, senior leaders and business managers, the challenge is not simply following a fair process, but communicating effectively throughout.
In this month’s webinar, I discussed these issues with Harry Parker, Employment Partner, and Phill Lane Partner (People and Culture) at Miles Advisory. Below is a summary of what we discussed.
Spotlighting compliance
With employment law continuing to evolve, the stakes are increasing. Since April 2026, the maximum protective award for failures in collective redundancy consultation has doubled from 90 to 180 days’ full pay per affected employee. Looking ahead, the Employment Rights Act 2025 is expected to introduce an additional organisation-wide trigger for collective consultation obligations in 2027, broadening the circumstances in which employers must collectively consult. From 1 January 2027, the qualifying period of service for bringing an ordinary unfair dismissal claim reduces from two years to six months plus the current compensation cap is being removed. Against this backdrop, organisations need to ensure that redundancy processes are both legally compliant and supported by clear and credible communication.
Understanding Consultation Obligations
Under current UK law, employers must collectively consult where they propose 20 or more redundancies at one establishment within a 90-day period. This requires consultation with either a recognised trade union or elected employee representatives, the provision of prescribed information and the submission of Form HR1 to the Government. Consultation must start at least 30 days before the first dismissal takes effect where 20–99 redundancies are proposed, and at least 45 days before where 100 or more redundancies are proposed.
Alongside collective consultation, employers must also consider individual consultation obligations. Whether collective consultation is taking place or not, employers should ensure there is:
- A genuine redundancy situation
- A fair, non-discriminatory and objective selection process
- Meaningful consultation with affected employees
- Consideration of alternatives to redundancy, and
- Appropriate consideration of suitable alternative roles
Tribunals will look not just at whether consultation occurred, but whether it was genuine and meaningful. In particular, collective consultation must be undertaken with a view to reaching agreement on ways of avoiding dismissals, reducing dismissal numbers and mitigating their consequences.
The Risks of Saying Too Little
One of the most common criticisms in redundancy-related claims is poor communication.
Managers can sometimes become so focused on process that they forget to explain the reasons behind decisions. Common mistakes include:
- Failing to explain the business rationale
- Not effectively communicating why roles are at risk
- Not discussing alternatives to redundancy or listening/responding to employee feedback
- Providing insufficient information for employees to respond
- Not explaining what support is available
- Presenting proposals as though decisions have already been made
- Not keeping an open mind during the whole process
This creates an information vacuum.
Employees naturally want to understand why the organisation is restructuring, how decisions will be made and whether alternatives have been considered. When employers fail to communicate effectively, rumours and misinformation quickly fills the gap.
A fair redundancy process is not simply about following the correct steps. It is also about helping employees understand the business rationale and providing them with a genuine opportunity to contribute to discussions. Practical measures such as FAQs, fact sheets, manager briefings and regular updates can all help support meaningful consultation.
The Risks of Saying Too Much
While saying too little creates risks, so does saying too much.
Managers often want to reassure employees during periods of uncertainty. However, comments such as:
- “There will be no compulsory redundancies.”
- “Everyone affected will get another role.”
- “You’ll definitely be redeployed.”
can become problematic if circumstances later change.
Similarly, managers should avoid comments that could suggest decisions are influenced by age, disability, pregnancy, ethnicity, sex or other protected characteristics. Discrimination claims are also a key risk factor in redundancy exercises.
The safest approach is to have a balanced communication strategy: being transparent about what is known, honest about what remains uncertain and careful not to make guarantees that cannot be honoured.
Avoiding a “Fait Accompli”
One of the greatest consultation risks is creating the impression that the outcome has already been decided.
This can undermine the entire consultation process.
Tribunals frequently examine whether consultation was meaningful or whether employees were simply informed of a predetermined decision. Employers should always be able to demonstrate that consultation was undertaken with an open mind and that feedback was genuinely considered – right up to the end of the consultation process and any appeal. With the stakes of an unfair dismissal claim rising and the increase in protective award claims and compensation, the need to follow a fair process has never been more important.
The Forgotten Audience: Employees Who Stay
When organisations go through redundancies, much of the attention, understandably, focuses on employees whose roles are at risk. There are consultations to manage, difficult conversations to have and legal obligations to meet. As a result, those employees often receive most of the communication and support. However, this can mean that another critical audience is overlooked: the employees who remain.
These individuals will determine whether the organisation succeeds after the restructure. They are the people who will lead teams, serve customers, maintain performance and rebuild momentum. They need to understand the future strategy, remain committed to it and help deliver it. Yet they are often the group that receives the least attention.
Understanding “Survivor Syndrome”
As soon as a redundancy programme is announced, uncertainty naturally spreads throughout the workforce, regardless of whether individuals are directly affected. Employees begin asking themselves important questions whilst many may begin exploring opportunities elsewhere.
Others experience a form of “survivor syndrome”. They know colleagues are leaving, anticipate increased workloads and may feel guilty about remaining. Some question how the organisation reached this point and whether leadership has a credible plan for the future. These reactions are entirely understandable. The challenge is that they are happening amongst the very people the organisation needs to remain focused, motivated and engaged.
The Business Impact of Poor Communication
Poor communication during redundancies can have significant business consequences.
First, organisations face an increased flight risk amongst key talent. High performers are often the first employees to explore opportunities elsewhere when uncertainty increases. Second, trust in leadership can be damaged. Employees are far more likely to support difficult decisions when leadership provides a clear and credible explanation of why change is necessary. Third, productivity recovery can be slowed. While some disruption during consultation is inevitable, uncertainty can continue long after the process ends if employees lack confidence in the future direction of the organisation. Finally, poorly managed communication can undermine the long-term success of the restructure itself. If employees do not understand or support the organisational vision, the business may struggle to achieve the benefits the redundancy programme was intended to deliver.
Conclusion
Managing redundancies successfully requires more than legal compliance. Employers must ensure they meet both collective and individual consultation obligations, provide meaningful opportunities for engagement and avoid treating consultation (and dismissal) as a foregone conclusion.
Equally important is communication.
Organisations must avoid both extremes: saying too little and creating an information vacuum, or saying too much and making promises they cannot keep.
Most importantly, they must remember that redundancy communication is not solely about those leaving the business. It is also about those who remain. The organisations that emerge strongest from restructuring are often those that communicate with transparency, empathy and clarity, helping employees understand not only what is changing, but why, and what the future looks like once the consultation process has ended.
For help and support for your business on issues around restructure and redundancy, please reach out.
Watch our webinar Making Redundancies – Compliance & Communication