Police Staff Redundancy Rights Explained
Unlike warranted officers, police staff are ordinary employees — which means genuine UK redundancy law applies to you in full. Here's what that actually means: fair selection, consultation, suitable alternative employment, and where to check what your own force offers.
If you're police staff — a non-warranted civilian employee such as a call handler, forensic or CSI worker, HR, finance, IT, or a civilian investigator — you're covered by the same UK redundancy law that applies to most employees. That includes statutory redundancy pay with two or more years' service, fair selection criteria, a proper consultation process, and the right to be considered for suitable alternative employment before being dismissed. Many forces also run their own more generous contractual schemes on top of the statutory minimum — always check your own force's HR policy for the specifics that apply to you.
Why this genuinely doesn't apply to officers
This is one of the clearer structural differences between police staff and warranted officers, and it surprises a lot of people. A warranted officer holds the office of constable rather than a contract of employment, so the redundancy provisions in the Employment Rights Act 1996 don't attach to them at all — there is no legal mechanism to make a serving constable redundant. Police staff, by contrast, are employed under an ordinary contract of employment, so redundancy law applies to you in exactly the way it would at most other employers.
If you want the full explanation of why officer status is different, and the real routes that do end an officer's career (probationary dismissal, misconduct, ill-health retirement and so on), that's covered in depth in our companion guide.
What actually makes a redundancy situation "genuine"
Redundancy, in law, is about the role — not the person in it. A genuine redundancy situation exists where an employer no longer needs employees to carry out work of a particular kind, in a particular place, or in the same numbers as before — for example because a service is being reorganised, a function is being outsourced or automated, or budget pressures mean fewer posts of a given type are needed. It applies regardless of who currently holds the role.
That distinction matters, because it's what separates a lawful redundancy from an unfair dismissal dressed up as one. If what's actually happening is that an employer is unhappy with a specific individual's performance or conduct, and uses "redundancy" as the label for removing that person while the role itself continues to exist and be filled, that isn't a genuine redundancy — and it can be challenged.
What genuine redundancy law actually gives you
As a police staff employee facing a genuine redundancy situation, the same core protections apply to you as to most other UK employees:
Statutory redundancy pay
With two or more years' continuous service, you qualify for statutory redundancy pay calculated by age band, length of service and weekly pay, subject to the statutory weekly pay cap.
A genuine redundancy situation
The role or a number of posts must genuinely no longer be needed — not a relabelled performance or conduct dismissal.
Fair, objective selection criteria
Where a pool of employees is being reduced, selection must be based on fair, objective criteria applied consistently, not an arbitrary or discriminatory choice.
Individual consultation
You're entitled to meaningful individual consultation about the proposal, the selection process and any alternatives, before a final decision is made.
Collective consultation (20+ proposed at one establishment)
Where 20 or more redundancies are proposed at one establishment within 90 days, the force must collectively consult recognised unions or elected representatives under TULRCA, with a minimum consultation period before dismissals take effect.
Suitable alternative employment
The force must consider redeployment into a suitable alternative role before dismissing for redundancy.
The right to challenge an unfair process
If a genuine redundancy situation, fair selection or proper consultation isn't followed, you may have grounds for an unfair dismissal claim.
What tends to trigger a genuine redundancy situation
Redundancy situations for police staff don't arise in a vacuum — they're almost always tied to a wider organisational change. Common, genuine triggers include a force reorganising a department so that fewer posts of a certain kind are needed, a support function being centralised, shared with another force, or outsourced to an external provider, a service being scaled back or discontinued because of budget pressures, or new technology and systems reducing the number of staff needed to deliver the same function. None of these has to happen in isolation — a force merger, covered in a separate guide on this site, can involve several of these triggers at once.
What all of these genuinely have in common is that the change is about the work itself, not about any specific individual's suitability for it. That's the throughline that separates a genuine redundancy situation from a dismissal that's really about performance or conduct wearing a redundancy label.
The two-year qualifying rule
To qualify for statutory redundancy pay, you generally need at least two years' continuous service with your employer under the Employment Rights Act 1996. Statutory redundancy pay is then calculated using a formula based on your age band, your length of service, and your weekly pay — subject to the statutory weekly pay cap, which is reviewed and uprated periodically, so check the current figure at gov.uk rather than relying on a number you've seen elsewhere.
If you have less than two years' service, you generally won't qualify for statutory redundancy pay, though you may still be entitled to notice pay and other contractual entitlements, and a genuine redundancy process (fair selection, consultation, consideration of alternatives) is still good practice for an employer to follow even where statutory redundancy pay itself isn't in play. If this applies to you, it's worth checking your own contract and your force's HR policy directly.
Collective consultation: the 20+ threshold
Individual consultation — being told what's proposed and given a genuine chance to respond — applies whenever you personally are at risk of redundancy. But where a force proposes 20 or more redundancies at one establishment within a 90-day period, additional obligations kick in under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULRCA): the employer must collectively consult recognised trade unions, or elected employee representatives where no union is recognised, before any dismissals take effect.
A minimum consultation period applies before dismissals can take effect once that threshold is reached, and the exact minimum period depends on the numbers involved — rather than assert a specific day-count here, the honest answer is to check the current statutory minimum directly (your union or staff association will know it, and it's a matter of public record) rather than rely on a figure that may be out of date or misremembered.
If a force is proposing a genuinely large-scale restructuring — for example as part of a merger or a major service redesign — this collective consultation duty is one of the clearest signs of how seriously the law treats large redundancy exercises, and it's a process your union or staff association will typically be directly involved in from an early stage.
It's worth being clear about what this threshold does and doesn't change. Below 20 proposed redundancies at one establishment within 90 days, individual consultation still applies in full — you don't lose your right to a genuine, meaningful conversation about the proposal just because the numbers are small. What changes above the threshold is the addition of a parallel, collective process with recognised unions or elected representatives, running alongside (not instead of) your own individual consultation.
Suitable alternative employment
Before dismissing anyone for redundancy, an employer — including a police force — is expected to consider whether there's a suitable alternative role the employee could move into instead, rather than jumping straight to dismissal. What counts as "suitable" depends on the individual's circumstances: their skills, experience, pay, location, and how the alternative role compares to their current one.
This cuts both ways. If you're offered a genuinely suitable alternative role and you turn it down without good reason, you risk losing your entitlement to redundancy pay — the law treats an unreasonable refusal of a suitable offer as effectively opting out of the redundancy situation. If the offered role genuinely isn't suitable (a significant pay cut, an unreasonable location change, or a role that doesn't use your skills, for example), that's a different picture, and your reasons for declining matter.
Because "suitable" and "unreasonable" are both judged on the specifics, if you're weighing up whether to accept or decline an alternative role during a redundancy process, it's worth getting advice from your union or staff association before deciding, rather than assuming either outcome is automatic.
If the process isn't followed properly
A redundancy dismissal has to actually follow a fair process to be lawful: a genuine redundancy situation, fair and objective selection criteria applied consistently, meaningful consultation, and proper consideration of suitable alternative employment. If a force skips or short-circuits any of these — for example by picking who to make redundant based on something other than fair, objective criteria, or by presenting a decision as already made rather than genuinely consulting — that opens the door to an unfair dismissal claim, separate from any dispute about the redundancy payment itself.
Most forces also have an internal appeal stage built into their redundancy process, allowing an affected employee to challenge the selection decision or process before it's finalised. If you're going through this, your union or staff association representative is the right first port of call — both to understand your specific force's process and to help you judge whether what's happening looks procedurally sound.
An unfair dismissal claim and a dispute over the redundancy payment itself are two separate things, and it's worth keeping that distinction clear in your own head even if both end up in play at once. A dispute about whether you were paid the correct statutory (or enhanced contractual) redundancy amount is essentially a calculation question. A claim that the dismissal itself was unfair is a broader question about whether the whole process — the genuineness of the redundancy, the fairness of selection, the adequacy of consultation — met the legal standard. Time limits apply to bringing a formal claim, so if you think you have grounds, getting advice promptly rather than waiting matters more than it might feel like it does in the moment.
What "good" consultation actually looks like, from your side
"Consultation" can sound like a formality, but done properly it's meant to be a genuine two-way process, not a box-ticking briefing. Good consultation means being given enough real information to understand the proposal — the business reason, the pool you're in, the criteria being used and how they apply to you — early enough that your response could realistically still change the outcome, not after the decision has effectively already been made.
It also means being told clearly what alternatives have been, or will be, considered on your behalf: redeployment searches, retraining, part-time or reduced-hours options, or a role elsewhere in the force. If you're not being told any of this, it's a fair and reasonable thing to ask for directly, in writing, rather than assume it's happening in the background.
Bringing a union or staff association representative to consultation meetings is standard practice, not an escalation — most people find it makes the conversation more structured and less stressful, and a rep who deals with these processes regularly will often spot things worth pushing back on that aren't obvious from the inside of a single, personally stressful process.
Statutory minimum vs your force's own scheme
Everything above describes the statutory minimum — the legal floor that applies to every qualifying employee in the UK, police staff included. It is not necessarily what you'd actually receive. Many police forces run their own contractual redundancy schemes that pay more generously than the statutory formula, as part of their wider staff terms and conditions.
What's actually on offer varies significantly by force, and isn't something this guide — or any general guide — can state accurately for your specific situation. If redundancy is a live possibility for you, the right next steps are: check your own force's HR policy or staff handbook directly, speak to your union or staff association (UNISON, Unite and GMB all represent police staff, alongside force-specific staff associations), and don't assume a figure you've seen quoted for a different force, or for officers, applies to you.
A genuine redundancy process, step by step
Exact procedures vary by force, but a properly run redundancy process generally moves through a broadly similar shape:
Business case / proposal
The force identifies a genuine business reason why a role, or a number of roles, may no longer be needed — a reorganisation, a service reduction, a budget-driven restructure, or a function being outsourced or automated. This is the point at which HR and, where the numbers involved meet the threshold, recognised unions are typically first briefed.
Pooling and provisional selection criteria
Where more than one person could potentially be affected, the force identifies the genuine pool of employees whose roles are at risk, and sets out the criteria it proposes to use to select within that pool if not everyone can be retained.
Notification / at-risk status
Affected employees are formally told they are at risk of redundancy, and given the reasons, the proposed timetable, and the proposed selection criteria (where relevant).
Individual consultation
Each affected employee is entitled to meaningful individual consultation — a genuine opportunity to respond to the proposal, ask questions, suggest alternatives, and understand how any selection criteria apply to them specifically, before a final decision is made.
Collective consultation (where the 20+ threshold applies)
Where 20 or more redundancies are proposed at one establishment within 90 days, the force must also collectively consult recognised trade unions or elected representatives, in parallel with individual consultation, before any dismissals take effect.
Consideration of alternatives
Before confirming any dismissal, the force is expected to have genuinely considered alternatives — redeployment into a suitable alternative role, voluntary redundancy, retraining, or reduced hours, depending on what's realistic in the circumstances.
Decision and notice
Where redundancy is confirmed, the employee is given formal notice, along with details of their redundancy pay calculation and any applicable notice pay.
Appeal
Most forces provide an internal appeal stage, allowing the employee to challenge the selection decision or the process itself before it's treated as final.
For managers: what a defensible process actually looks like
If you're a manager involved in running a redundancy process rather than affected by one, the practical risk to guard against is a process that looks, on paper, like a decision that was already made before consultation started. Genuine consultation means the outcome is genuinely still open when it begins — employees should be able to influence the pool, the criteria, or the outcome, not simply be informed of a finished decision.
Documenting the business reason for the redundancy situation, the pool selected and why, the criteria used and how they were scored, and the alternatives genuinely considered for each affected employee, is what allows a force to show — if the process is later challenged — that it was handled fairly and lawfully. Skipping that documentation doesn't just create legal risk; it also makes it much harder to have a fair, defensible conversation with an individual employee about why they were selected.
Common myths, corrected
Worked scenarios
Illustrative examples showing how the rules above apply in practice — not drawn from any specific real case.
A single back-office role is deleted
Context: A force restructures a finance team and decides one administrative post is no longer needed, while the rest of the team continues unchanged.
What applies: Because only one role is affected, this sits below the 20+ collective consultation threshold, but the individual affected is still entitled to a genuine, individual consultation process, fair consideration of the business reason, and consideration of any suitable alternative role elsewhere in the force before dismissal.
A department-wide restructure
Context: A force redesigns a whole department, reducing the total number of posts and changing job descriptions, affecting well over 20 staff at one site.
What applies: This triggers the collective consultation duty under TULRCA, alongside individual consultation with each affected employee. A minimum consultation period applies before any dismissals can take effect, and unions are typically involved from the pooling and criteria stage onward.
A voluntary scheme launched first
Context: Before any compulsory selection, the force invites expressions of interest in voluntary redundancy across the affected area, to see how many posts can be reduced without compulsory selection.
What applies: Employees who volunteer aren't automatically accepted — the force still decides based on business need, such as retaining specific skills. If enough suitable volunteers come forward, compulsory selection for the remainder may not be needed at all.
An employee declines an alternative role
Context: An employee at risk of redundancy is offered a role in a different team, doing broadly similar work at the same grade and pay, but declines it because they'd prefer to take redundancy pay instead.
What applies: Whether this is treated as an unreasonable refusal — risking loss of redundancy pay — depends on whether the alternative was genuinely suitable for that individual's circumstances. This is exactly the kind of judgement call worth discussing with a union rep before making a final decision.
If you've been told you're at risk: a practical checklist
Quick glossary
FAQ
Can police staff actually be made redundant?
How long do you need to work for a force before you qualify for statutory redundancy pay?
What makes a redundancy situation genuine, rather than a disguised performance dismissal?
When does collective consultation apply to a police force making staff redundant?
What is "suitable alternative employment" and why does it matter?
Do all forces pay the same redundancy terms?
More questions, answered briefly
Officers vs police staff: redundancy specifics at a glance
| Warranted Officers | Police Staff | |
|---|---|---|
| Can be made redundant? | No — office of constable, not a contract of employment | Yes — ordinary employee under the Employment Rights Act 1996 |
| Qualifying service for statutory redundancy pay | Not applicable | Two or more years' continuous service |
| Collective consultation duty (20+ at one site within 90 days) | Not applicable | Applies under TULRCA |
| Suitable alternative employment doctrine | Not applicable | Applies — unreasonable refusal risks losing redundancy pay |
| On a force merger | Statutory transfer of office, typically under the Police Act 1996 | TUPE 2006 can apply |
| Enhanced scheme beyond the legal minimum | Not applicable | Varies by force — check your own force's HR policy |
Red flags worth raising with your rep
None of these automatically means a process is unlawful, but each is a reasonable prompt to ask more questions:
Consultation feels like a formality
If meetings are presented as informing you of a decision already made, rather than genuinely inviting your input on the proposal, pool or criteria, that undermines the legal requirement for meaningful consultation.
Selection criteria are vague or unexplained
Fair, objective criteria should be specific enough to be scored consistently. "General suitability" or similarly vague criteria, applied without a clear scoring rationale, are harder to defend as objective.
You're never told why you're in the pool you're in
The pool of employees considered for selection should be identifiable and explainable — if it isn't, that's worth raising directly.
An alternative role offer arrives with no real detail
A genuinely considered suitable alternative employment offer should come with enough detail (pay, hours, location, duties) for you to properly assess whether it's suitable for your circumstances.
No internal appeal route is offered
Most properly run processes include an internal appeal stage. Its absence isn't necessarily unlawful on its own, but it removes an important safety check on the decision.
Good questions to bring to your union or staff association rep
Related Guides
Independent Guide
PolicePay is independent and not affiliated with any police force, the Home Office or the College of Policing. This is general guidance on the legal framework, not legal advice — if your own role is genuinely at risk of redundancy, get advice from your union, staff association or a solicitor about your specific circumstances.