Can a Redundancy Selection Pool Contain One Employee?

A redundancy selection pool is the group of employees from which an employer chooses who will be made redundant. In England and Wales, employers are required to act fairly and reasonably when deciding who should be placed in this pool.

In some cases, a redundancy selection pool may contain only one employee. While this is legally possible, it is closely scrutinised by employment tribunals to ensure the employer has not unfairly engineered redundancy by artificially narrowing the pool.

The central legal question is whether the employer's choice of pool is reasonable in the circumstances and consistent with the need to carry out a fair redundancy process under the Employment Rights Act 1996.

What Is a Redundancy Selection Pool?

A redundancy selection pool is the group of employees whose roles are genuinely at risk of redundancy. Employers use the pool to:

• Identify comparable roles
• Apply objective selection criteria
• Determine which employees will be dismissed
• Ensure fairness in restructuring decisions

There is no fixed statutory definition of how large a pool must be. Instead, it is governed by case law and principles of reasonableness.

Government guidance emphasises that selection for redundancy must be fair and based on objective criteria rather than arbitrary decisions.

Can a Selection Pool Legally Contain One Employee?

Yes. A redundancy selection pool can lawfully contain a single employee in appropriate circumstances.

This typically occurs where:

• Only one employee performs a unique role
• A specific job function is being removed entirely
• A department is restructured and only one role is affected
• There are no other comparable employees doing similar work

In such cases, the “pool of one” may be justified because there is no meaningful alternative group for comparison.

When a Single-Employee Pool Is Likely to Be Fair

Tribunals are more likely to accept a single-employee pool where:

• The employee has a unique skill set or job function
• The role is genuinely standalone within the organisation
• The redundancy arises from elimination of a specific position
• There are no interchangeable roles in practice

For example, a specialist technical role or a standalone managerial post may justify a single-person pool if no other employees perform similar duties.

When a Single-Employee Pool May Be Unfair

A pool containing only one employee may be legally risky where:

• Other employees perform similar or interchangeable work
• The employer deliberately narrows the pool to ensure a specific outcome
• Comparable roles are excluded without justification
• The selection appears predetermined rather than evidence-based

Employment tribunals will often consider whether the employer “unreasonably failed” to include other employees in the pool.

Case law has established that employers have discretion in defining pools, but that discretion must be exercised reasonably and not perversely or capriciously.

How Tribunals Assess the Fairness of a Selection Pool

When reviewing redundancy disputes, tribunals typically examine:

• Whether the employer identified a genuine redundancy situation
• Whether alternative pools were considered
• Whether employees were performing similar work
• Whether the employer acted reasonably in limiting the pool
• Whether consultation was meaningful

The key test is not whether the tribunal would have chosen a different pool, but whether the employer's choice was within the range of reasonable responses.

The Importance of “Interchangeable Roles”

A major factor in determining whether a single-employee pool is fair is interchangeability.

Employees are more likely to be included in the same pool where they:

• Perform similar duties
• Can be deployed interchangeably
• Share similar skill sets
• Work within the same operational function

If roles are interchangeable, excluding employees from the pool can make the redundancy unfair.

Consultation Requirements for a Single-Employee Pool

Even where only one employee is in the selection pool, employers must still carry out a fair consultation process.

This includes:

• Explaining why the role is at risk
• Discussing alternatives to redundancy
• Considering redeployment options
• Allowing the employee to challenge the pool definition
• Reviewing whether other roles could be included

Failure to consult properly can result in a finding of unfair dismissal even if the redundancy itself is genuine.

Alternative Employment and Redeployment Duties

Before confirming redundancy, employers must consider whether suitable alternative employment exists.

This may include:

• Other roles within the organisation
• Modified versions of the current role
• Positions at a different level or department

Where alternative roles exist, employers must offer them where appropriate, particularly during consultation.

Common Disputes Involving Pools of One

Typical legal disputes include:

• Whether the employer wrongly isolated one employee
• Whether other employees should have been included in the pool
• Whether redundancy was used to target a specific individual
• Whether consultation was genuine or predetermined
• Whether alternative roles were properly considered

These disputes often arise in restructures involving managerial or specialist positions.

Practical Examples

Example 1: Genuine standalone role

A company removes a compliance officer role that only one employee performs. A pool of one is likely to be fair if no other employees perform similar duties.

Example 2: Overlapping duties ignored

Two employees perform similar administrative work, but only one is placed in the pool. This may be unfair if roles are interchangeable.

Example 3: Department restructure

A business restructures a department where only one senior manager role exists. A single-person pool may be justified, provided consultation is fair.

Legal Risks for Employers

Using a selection pool of one can create legal exposure if not carefully justified.

Risks include:

• Unfair dismissal claims
• Failure to properly consult
• Challenge to selection criteria
• Allegations of predetermined outcome
• Discrimination claims where protected characteristics are involved

Employment tribunals often examine whether the pool was genuinely determined by business needs or artificially constructed.

Employee Options When Challenging a Pool of One

Employees who believe the selection pool is unfair may:

• Request written justification for the pool definition
• Compare roles across the organisation
• Raise a grievance internally
• Challenge selection criteria and scoring
• Bring a tribunal claim for unfair dismissal

Time limits generally apply, usually three months less one day from dismissal.

Key Takeaways

A redundancy selection pool can legally contain one employee, but only where this reflects genuine business realities. Employers must ensure that the role is truly standalone and that no other employees perform interchangeable work. Tribunals will closely examine whether the pool was reasonably defined and whether consultation was fair. If other comparable employees exist, limiting the pool to one person may lead to a finding of unfair dismissal.