The EAT case of Samsung Electronics (UK) Ltd v Mr K Montge-D’Cruz is a good illustration of it being harder to argue lack of consultation and unfair selection when a number of persons (including s/he at risk of redundancy) are considered for a new/alternative position than when examining consultation and selection in respect of the original redundancy decision.   For example, whilst a ‘subjectivity argument’ carries weight in respect of application of redundancy selection criterion it is less persuasive in respect of selection for alternative employment.  That said, fairness and reasonableness should always prevail.