Job Outsourced - Redundancy Query

Job Outsourced - Redundancy Query

Author
Discussion

lenny007

Original Poster:

1,338 posts

220 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
Evening all,

Just after a bit of advice from anyone to see if they can shed some light on a situation my wife is in.

She works for a large multinational company with main offices in India and over the last 12 - 18 months or so, her job role has been reduced by about half as the company has restructured.

However, both her and her colleagues have today noted that the remaining part of their roles are being advertised for a position in Mumbai, effectively removing her work and making the position redundant.

My first thought - rightly or wrongly - is that they are effectively advertising for her position without informing her or discussing this with her and that this is a breach of contract / employment law. The position is still available in the company but they have relocated it elsewhere. In essence, they are making her personally redundant and not the position.

I'm sure there is some way in which the company have arranged this in that UK employment law is not applicable here but i'm not sure and would like some clarification if possible.

Then again, knowing the way they have treated other employees over the years, it's entirely possible this is being done in full knowledge that it is breaching her contract and they don't care about the consequences.

Either way, it would be good to know your thoughts on this.

Thanks in advance.

davepoth

29,395 posts

198 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
Legally, they're fine.

https://www.gov.uk/employer-relocation-your-rights

Technically I suppose she could offer to move to India with the job but I guess that's not going to happen.

lenny007

Original Poster:

1,338 posts

220 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
davepoth said:
Legally, they're fine.

https://www.gov.uk/employer-relocation-your-rights

Technically I suppose she could offer to move to India with the job but I guess that's not going to happen.
Sorry, just to clarify -

The place she works will still be operating and open, it's just that they have decided to centralise the job(s) that she does and that is going to be in India.



lenny007

Original Poster:

1,338 posts

220 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
swerni said:
Does she want to relocate and take a massive pay cut?
Er, no.

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
Your wife's job is becoming redundant - it's not personal. If an employer has a reduced need for work of a particular kind at a particular place, then there is a redundancy situation. The employer must comply with various rules as to consultation if there are to be numerous redundancies, and must conduct a fair procedure, but an employee cannot challenge the business decision to arrange for some work to be done at another location.

Eric Mc

121,779 posts

264 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
If the same job is being done by somebody else, how can the "job" be redundant?

edc

9,231 posts

250 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
If the same job is being done by somebody else, how can the "job" be redundant?
Because as above it is the work of that kind or the job at that location. You have to look at the full context. Outsourcing, moving work for low cost manufacture, none of these may reduce the need for the work to be done or even the actual headcount but can all result in a redundancy situation.

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
Because Parliament says so:

Employment Rights Act 1996

139 Redundancy.

(1)For the purposes of this Act an employee who is dismissed shall be taken to be dismissed by reason of redundancy if the dismissal is wholly or mainly attributable to—

(a)the fact that his employer has ceased or intends to cease—

(i)to carry on the business for the purposes of which the employee was employed by him, or

(ii)to carry on that business in the place where the employee was so employed, or

(b)the fact that the requirements of that business—

(i)for employees to carry out work of a particular kind, or

(ii)for employees to carry out work of a particular kind in the place where the employee was employed by the employer,
have ceased or diminished or are expected to cease or diminish.



lenny007

Original Poster:

1,338 posts

220 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
This is my point i suppose.

The work she is doing on site will still be getting done - just from India. The role / position is not redundant but the person effectively is.

I suspect that this is correct, even if morally it is not.

The second part of this however, is that they are advertising for "her" job - albeit in another country - prior to informing her of her position or the position of the company.

Nobody at this point knows if redundancy or alternative placements will be offered but the job is advertised on the company website.

Surely this is in breach of employment procedures and law?

edc

9,231 posts

250 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
You need to be realistic. Unfortunately I've managed a few redundancy/outsource/relocation/consolidation call them what you want projects. The company will not be watching one walk out the door as the other walks in. In many cases you will both be in together. How else is knowledge and experience transfer supposed to happen?

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
You may not think that the role is becoming redundant, but an Employment Tribunal would disagree with you, based on decades of redundancy law. At present, the employer needs X number of employees to do job Y at place Z. Soon, it will require fewer or no employees to do job Y at place Z. If you think it immoral for a business to make business decisions, Jeremy Corbyn is over there on the left, but, otherwise, welcome to the Capitalist economy.

The employer should conduct a fair procedure before dismissing employees with two years or more service, and if it does not it risks a finding of unfair dismissal, but a Tribunal won't look into the business decision that leads to the job or jobs becoming redundant.

lenny007

Original Poster:

1,338 posts

220 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
Because Parliament says so:

Employment Rights Act 1996

139 Redundancy.

(1)For the purposes of this Act an employee who is dismissed shall be taken to be dismissed by reason of redundancy if the dismissal is wholly or mainly attributable to—

(a)the fact that his employer has ceased or intends to cease—

(i)to carry on the business for the purposes of which the employee was employed by him, or

(ii)to carry on that business in the place where the employee was so employed, or

(b)the fact that the requirements of that business—

(i)for employees to carry out work of a particular kind, or

(ii)for employees to carry out work of a particular kind in the place where the employee was employed by the employer,
have ceased or diminished or are expected to cease or diminish.
Parts a) (i) and (ii), and Part b) (i) are not applicable due to the facts i noted before. Part b) (ii) is the point in order - however, she is a buyer for the company. The company will still be employing a buyer for the site so the requirements for someone to carry out the work has not ceased or diminished as the production / output for the company at the site on which she is employed has remained and is expected to remain constant and not diminish.

More learned people than me understand this stuff but it would appear that the only grey area in the company not being in breach of Employment Law is that there is another country / location involved.

lenny007

Original Poster:

1,338 posts

220 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
edc said:
You need to be realistic. Unfortunately I've managed a few redundancy/outsource/relocation/consolidation call them what you want projects. The company will not be watching one walk out the door as the other walks in. In many cases you will both be in together. How else is knowledge and experience transfer supposed to happen?
I'd like to think i am realistic. It's been kind of put in front of me this evening but all i really wanted to get is a better idea of the ramifications of this decision / process.

Incidentally, the company are sending over representatives next week to actually find out what my wife and her team do, before realising they have no idea of how to do it.

This is not a comment based on sour grapes - more based on the recent outsourcing of another team in the company which took place in last autumn and which was so successful, the team in the UK has been partially reassembled / taken out of the relocated roles in order to fix the mess caused in the last 4 months.

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
You are misreading the Statute. You have to read every word and not just cherry pick to suit your preconception. The requirements of the employer for work of a particular kind IN THE PLACE where the employee works are ceasing. An employer is at liberty to arrange its business so that its needs are met from another country. That's not unlawful.

You can keep on asking the question, and maybe someone who hasn't a clue will come along and give you the answer you want, but the answer I have given you, although not what you want, happens to be the right answer. Sorry, but there it is.

edc

9,231 posts

250 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
Sorry to say but I made a team of circa 6 buyers redundant and "moved" the jobs to Germany and India. That is global manufacturing for you. The company has simply chosen to carry out the buying work elsewhere. Unless you are going there then you have to move on and get a new job at some point.

lenny007

Original Poster:

1,338 posts

220 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
You may not think that the role is becoming redundant, but an Employment Tribunal would disagree with you, based on decades of redundancy law. At present, the employer needs X number of employees to do job Y at place Z. Soon, it will require fewer or no employees to do job Y at place Z. If you think it immoral for a business to make business decisions, Jeremy Corbyn is over there on the left, but, otherwise, welcome to the Capitalist economy.

The employer should conduct a fair procedure before dismissing employees with two years or more service, and if it does not it risks a finding of unfair dismissal, but a Tribunal won't look into the business decision that leads to the job or jobs becoming redundant.
I fully agree with what you are saying - other than the Jeremy Corbyn comment which was uncalled for and for which i seek a full apology (nobody needs to be compared to that individual) irked

Now that i've had confirmed which i suspected, i suppose the only thing to consider is would the procedure be considered fair by advertising the post prior to notifying the employees. confused

lenny007

Original Poster:

1,338 posts

220 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
You are misreading the Statute. You have to read every word and not just cherry pick to suit your preconception. The requirements of the employer for work of a particular kind IN THE PLACE where the employee works are ceasing. An employer is at liberty to arrange its business so that its needs are met from another country. That's not unlawful.

You can keep on asking the question, and maybe someone who hasn't a clue will come along and give you the answer you want, but the answer I have given you, although not what you want, happens to be the right answer. Sorry, but there it is.
No need to apologise - bit of cross posting here but as i said above, i agree with what you said earlier. I'm just trying to understand the why's and wherefores of it all. I'm trying my hardest not to appear as if i'm asking the same questions again and again and i certainly don't want someone to give me an answer for the sake of it. Being misinformed doesn't help anyone.

If i did have a preconception, i've been trying to avoid showing it - the clarification from myself was merely as i realised i hadn't given all of the pertinent information about and thought the additional stuff might affect your comments. Obviously they didn't but again, at least i know for certain.

Other than the above, thank you for your comments and help - i appreciate it.

lenny007

Original Poster:

1,338 posts

220 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
edc said:
Sorry to say but I made a team of circa 6 buyers redundant and "moved" the jobs to Germany and India. That is global manufacturing for you. The company has simply chosen to carry out the buying work elsewhere. Unless you are going there then you have to move on and get a new job at some point.
Hey, it happens all the time. If you aren't involved in stuff like this (which i'm not) then it can be a bit of a minefield and forewarned is forearmed. Thanks for your help though, i appreciate it.

DanL

6,177 posts

264 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
lenny007 said:
Now that i've had confirmed which i suspected, i suppose the only thing to consider is would the procedure be considered fair by advertising the post prior to notifying the employees. confused
Wouldn't have thought it would be unfair. My company have shipped people over to train their replacements in another country before. As you can imagine, that feels great for all concerned.

As she's at risk, the company should make her aware of other roles in the company that she may be suited for and might want to apply for. One imagines that the roles in India won't be of interest!

I'd guess you might have a case if they were hiring her replacement in the UK, but I don't believe the same is true of the role moving abroad or pretty much all IT firms would have been sued into the ground by an army of angry programmers who's jobs are now being done outside of the U.K.

edc

9,231 posts

250 months

Tuesday 26th January 2016
quotequote all
Whether the work stays in the UK is to a large extent irrelevant. Amongst other things you have to consider mobility clauses, the proximity of the new or other location, but also look at each case on its facts. You don't think organisations move work around the country too? Sadly jobs can be made redundant just moving across town.