An employment tribunal has ruled that an NHS employer “unfairly denied” a senior specialist pharmacist a redundancy payment and awarded the pharmacist “a four-figure sum”, the PDA today (June 20) announced.
“The PDA member is a highly experienced pharmacist who was made redundant after an NHS restructure,” it said.
“Despite applying for a suitable role within the new structure, they were unsuccessful and offered two alternative roles,” it added.
Read more: ICBs ask for ‘understanding’ from pharmacies amid cash squeeze
The roles would have resulted in the pharmacist “being demoted to a lower band” or “would have removed their clinical responsibilities, involved more travel and would see their career progression stagnate”, according to the PDA.
“They declined both roles”, leading the employer to refuse to pay a redundancy payment “claiming the roles were suitable and that the member was being unreasonable”, it added.
Role “casually downgraded”
However, the tribunal “rejected the employer’s arguments”, the PDA said.
The court found that “the lower band role was a clear demotion” and the pharmacist’s concerns “about loss of clinical responsibilities, stalled career progression [and] pay” were reasonable.
Additionally, “offers made before official notice of dismissal do not qualify under the law as valid alternative employment”, it added.
Read more: Sir Jim Mackey: ICB job cuts ‘need to be done’ by December
“This victory sends a clear message that pharmacists are highly skilled professionals whose roles cannot be casually downgraded by employers through restructuring exercises,” the PDA said.
“It underscores that specialist pharmacists are not interchangeable within banding structures and that redeployment must be approached with genuine respect for their circumstances,” it added.
“Warning” to NHS
The PDA stressed that the judgement also “acts as a broader warning to NHS employers that restructuring efforts, however financially necessary, must be executed fairly [and] lawfully”.
“As NHS employers continue to restructure and reshape the workforce, the need for expert support is more crucial than ever,” it added.
C+D approached NHS England (NHSE) and NHS Resolution for comment.
Read more: Cuts and commissioning: What does NHSE’s axing mean for ICBs?
It comes after Prime Minister Keir Starmer made the momentous announcement in March that the Department of Health and Social Care (DH) is set to absorb NHSE over a two-year period.
At the time, NHSE chief financial officer and deputy chief executive Julian Kelly confirmed that as part of the move integrated care boards (ICBs) must cut headcounts by 50% – leaving some 12,500 ICB staff at risk of losing their jobs.
Read more: Lloydspharmacy: 80 ex-Sainsbury’s pharmacists head to employment tribunal
When questioned on ICB cuts at a Medical Journalists’ Association (MJA) event last month, Mackey admitted that while he “still really wants this to be enacted in this financial year…none of this is nailed down to the point where it’s a completely fixed commitment”.
But he stressed that job cuts must be “done” by “the end of quarter three” in December.
