In Readman v Devon Primary Care Trust the EAT held that when determining whether, in a redundancy situation, a suitable alternative job has been refused unreasonably, the test is whether the job is suitable in relation to that particular employee and he or she is being unreasonable in rejecting it, not whether a reasonable employee would have accepted the job.

Under the Employment Rights Act 1996, an employee who unreasonably refuses a suitable alternative job offered to him or her in a redundancy situation will not be entitled to a statutory redundancy payment. Ms Readman’s job as a ‘Community Modern Matron’, running community and district nursing in one region of Devon was to be made redundant. She was offered an alternative role in a community hospital as a ‘Modern Matron’. She refused it on the basis that she had not worked in a hospital since 1985 and had no desire to do so. Ms Readman was refused her redundancy payment. An employment tribunal dismissed her claim, holding that she had unreasonably refused a suitable alternative job because a ‘hypothetical’ reasonable employee would have accepted the Trust’s offer.

The EAT upheld Ms Readman’s appeal. The test is not whether a reasonable employee ought to have accepted the alternative job, but whether that particular employee, taking into account his or her personal circumstances, was being reasonable in refusing the offer: did he or she have sound and justifiable reasons for turning the job down? Here, Ms Readman’s desire not to work in a hospital setting, given her particular circumstances, did provide her with a sound and justifiable reason for rejecting the offer and she was entitled to a redundancy payment.