Heraud v Roy Morgan Research Ltd

In *Heraud v Roy Morgan Research Ltd*, the applicant, Ms Heraud, brought proceedings against her employer, Roy Morgan Research Ltd, alleging unfair dismissal. The dispute arose from the redundancy of Ms Heraud's role as National Customised Operations Director/Project Director Customised Operations. The proceedings were heard by Judge Jones.

The court was required to determine whether Ms Heraud's dismissal was harsh, unjust, or unreasonable, which are the criteria for unfair dismissal under the relevant legislation. This involved examining the process followed by Roy Morgan Research Ltd in making Ms Heraud's role redundant and whether the reasons provided for the redundancy were genuine and properly communicated.

Judge Jones considered the letter dated 4 June 2014, which outlined the proposal to make Ms Heraud's role redundant due to a review of the Operations Department leading to a shift of roles and the removal of duplication. The letter indicated that the proposal was not a reflection of Ms Heraud's work performance and detailed a consultation process, including meetings and an opportunity for Ms Heraud to provide input and suggest alternatives. The court noted that Ms Heraud was informed of the decision to make her role redundant by correspondence dated 11 June 2014, effective 27 June 2014. The legal principle applied was that a redundancy process must be genuine and involve proper consultation with the affected employee.

The court found that the redundancy was genuine and that Roy Morgan Research Ltd had followed a proper process, including consultation, before making the decision. Consequently, the court determined that the dismissal was not unfair.