Suitable alternative employment: what UK employers must offer

Planning redundancies often focuses on which roles are to go. But, for UK employers, this process should also focus on which employees could stay. This is where suitable alternative employment comes in, giving companies a way to retain valuable skills, protect business continuity, and reduce the disruption that redundancy can cause to both departing employees and those remaining.

It’s also a legal obligation. UK employers must take reasonable steps to identify and offer suitable vacancies to those employees who are at risk of losing their jobs, rather than treating redundancies as the inevitable and only outcome.

Suitable alternative employment is a role that an employer offers to an employee whose existing position is being made redundant. This new position and its terms need to be appropriate for that individual. 

The role could be in a different department, at another location, or involve different responsibilities. It could require retraining or a change in working arrangements. It doesn’t have to be identical to the employee’s existing job, but suitability will be assessed in relation to the individual, not on what the organisation needs.

Relevant considerations need to include:

• Pay and benefits – salary, pension, bonuses, and other contractual benefits.
• Status and responsibilities – level of responsibility, seniority, and the nature of the work.
• Skills and experience – whether the employee can perform the role, with training if appropriate.
• Location and travel – commuting time, costs, and practical accessibility.
• Working arrangements – hours, shifts, flexibility, and any changes affecting caring responsibilities or personal circumstances.

As Acas suggests, it’s best to start with an individual assessment and an open conversation with the employee. A role with the same salary can still be unsuitable if it involves a significant shift in responsibilities, location, or working patterns. On the other hand, a different job title or need for training doesn’t automatically make a vacancy unsuitable.

The Employment Rights Act 1996 provides the statutory framework for suitable alternative employment and redundancy payments, with section 138 and section 141 being particularly relevant. Section 138 addresses when an employee isn’t regarded as being dismissed because their contract is renewed or they’re re-engaged, while section 141 looks at the circumstances where refusing suitable alternative employment can affect the entitlement to a statutory redundancy payment.

For employers, the important distinction is between 2 questions.

1. Is the alternative role suitable for the employee? Consider the job itself, its terms, and how it compares to the employee’s existing position.
2. Has the employee acted unreasonably in refusing it? It is necessary to assess the employee’s circumstances and reasons, rather than just coming to the conclusion that the employer considers the role a good fit.

An offer can be suitable and the refusal can be reasonable, so if an employee has reasonable grounds to refuse suitable alternative employment, they should be able to retain their entitlement to statutory redundancy pay. An unreasonable refusal can put that entitlement at risk.

This distinction is illustrated by the case of Devon Primary Care Trust v Readman [2013]. Mrs Readman, an experienced community nurse, was offered a matron role at a hospital. The tribunal considered the role suitable because it preserved her pay and status, and her skills were transferable. However, she’d spent many years working in community nursing and didn’t want to return to a hospital setting. 

The tribunal found that the role offered was suitable, but she had unreasonably refused it. However, the Employment Appeal Tribunal overturned that decision, finding that the tribunal had failed to give proper consideration to her personal reasons for refusing the role. Then the Court of Appeal allowed the employer’s appeal and sent the case back for the question of reasonableness to be reconsidered. It didn’t reach a conclusion as to whether her refusal was reasonable.

This highlights the principle that a suitable job offer doesn’t automatically make an employee’s refusal unreasonable, meaning that employers must consider the individual’s actual reasons for declining the role, rather than assuming that matching their pay, status, and skills is enough.

For HR teams, it comes down to documenting why a vacancy is considered suitable and the employee’s response and reasons behind it. A fair assessment requires both sides of the question to be considered. 

Redeploying staff isn’t just about fulfilling a legal requirement. It can help businesses to preserve insider knowledge, avoid unnecessary recruitment, and retain skills that are difficult or expensive to replace.

A 2026 survey from Careerminds, into AI-related redundancies, shows a gap between workforce decisions and the alternatives that employers consider before making them. Having surveyed 600 HR professionals, whose organisations had made redundancies in the previous 12 months, Careerminds found that:

• 55.1% of companies hadn’t formally discussed reskilling or redeploying before making redundancies.
• 51.3% of companies believed that, with the right support, up to a quarter of the people made redundant could have been moved into different roles within the company.
• 40.6% of HR professionals said better data on employee capabilities and skills would have improved their approach to workforce change.

These findings point to a practical problem – that employers make decisions about removing roles before understanding the skills that are already present within the business.

That is a great opportunity for HR. By mapping capabilities, reviewing vacancies, and considering reskilling before redundancy decisions are finalised, organisations can make better-informed choices about what happens to the workforce. 

One of the most important changes to redundancy protection took effect on 6 April 2024 under the Protection from Redundancy (Pregnancy and Family Leave) Act 2023 and its regulations. It states that eligible employees who are pregnant or who have taken maternity, adoption, or shared parental leave, have enhanced protection when suitable alternative vacancies arise. 

These employees have priority over other employees at risk of redundancy, and must be offered a suitable alternative vacancy. This protection extends to 18 months from the child’s birth or adoption placement, subject to statutory rules.

If statutory conditions apply, the employer must offer the vacancy to the protected employee, rather than requiring them to compete for it with other at-risk colleagues. Failure to comply with this can lead to an automatic unfair dismissal claim. Protected employees need to be identified early, relevant dates need to be recorded, and the vacancy-matching process needs to account for priority before other offers are made. 

It’s worth employing a consistent redeployment process as soon as redundancies are being considered, so follow these 4 steps: 

1. Create a record of vacancies

Get HR, recruitment teams, and managers to identify any vacancies and potential openings across the organisation. This list should include roles that haven’t been advertised, as well as opportunities in other teams or locations. 

This list will form the basis for a central vacancy register, which details the job title, location, salary, hours, essential requirements, and expected start date. Record when each vacancy was reviewed and which employees were considered, to create a record of opportunities explored and reduce the risk of suitable roles being overlooked.

2. Match vacancies to employees’ capabilities

Don’t make the mistake of relying on existing job titles or rigid assumptions about career paths. Instead, compare role requirements with each at-risk employee’s skills, qualifications, experience, and retraining potential. An employee may have transferable skills that make them suitable for a role in another function, particularly if training can bridge a skills gap.

3. Apply priority rules before making offers

Employees with enhanced statutory protection must be prioritised for suitable alternative vacancies where the law requires it. This is particularly important when several people could be matched to the same position. 

4. Make a clear written offer

A valid and detailed offer should be unconditional, put in writing before the existing employment ends, and include an explanation of how the new role differs from the old one. The new job must begin within four weeks of the old contract ending. The employee should be offered the job directly, rather than competing for it through the normal recruitment channels. If other employees are interested in the same role, HR should establish who has priority, then follow a fair process for any remaining candidates.

Working with an outplacement provider, such as Careerminds, supports your HR team with specialist redeployment and redundancy support as they navigate significant organisational change.

A redundancy trial period, usually four weeks, gives an employee time to get to grips with a new role and to see if it suits them. The four-week period normally begins after the employee’s notice period has ended and the previous contract has terminated. If more training is needed, the employer and employee can agree a longer trial period, but this must be put in writing with a clear end date.

The process can be managed as follows:

• Agree the role in writing, confirming start and end dates, which role is being trialled, and whether an extended period has been agreed, before the trial begins.
• Set clear expectations by explaining the duties, performance requirements, training, support, and differences from the previous role.
• Schedule review meetings, checking in during the trial rather than waiting until the end, and asking whether the employee has the information, skills, and support needed.
• Record feedback and adjustments, documenting any concerns, training provided, and changes agreed by both parties.
• Confirm the outcome at the end of the trial, recording whether the role has been accepted or rejected, and explaining the implications.

Bumping, also known as “transferred redundancy,” is a term used when no suitable vacancy exists, but another employee’s role could act as an alternative if the organisation changes who holds that role. 

For example, an employee whose position is disappearing is capable of performing a role held by someone else. The employer considers moving the at-risk employee into that role which means placing the other employee at risk instead.

This is normally up for consideration when a more senior or experienced employee’s job disappears, but the organisation is keen to keep hold of them. Relevant factors include similarity of the roles, the skills required, the contractual arrangements of both employees affected, and the wider impact on the organisation. 

The employer should also consider whether the affected employee has the capabilities to perform the alternative role. If bumping happens, the employee whose role is displaced must be treated fairly, with the organisation following the appropriate redundancy process.

Structured career support can make a huge difference to employees facing unfamiliar roles, addressing development gaps, and adapting to a different career direction. And it’s not just regular workers who require help. Managers need support too, as many have limited experience when it comes to assessing transferable capabilities or discussing career transitions with employees who are potentially losing their jobs.

A consistent approach is required to give employees a realistic view of options available, while helping the organisation to retain skills that might otherwise be gone forever. Careerminds has a 30:1 coaching ratio, supporting personalised career guidance at scale, helping employees to identify next steps and giving employers a more structured way to manage workforce transitions.

Suitable alternative employment is all about keeping valuable talent through redeployment – making it part of the redundancy plan rather than just an afterthought. As well as being a legal responsibility, offering suitable alternative employment gives you the chance to make better use of the people already in your organisation.

Before confirming your redundancy plan, can you demonstrate that you’ve explored every credible opportunity to keep hold of the employees that are vital to your organisation?