Redundancy and Handover

[Spydaman]

So I've been made redundant after 21 years which I accept and will get a decent payout. The last thing before I leave is to handover to those that remain. Next week I've been tasked with handing over in detail everything I know about the product and customers. I'm I two minds to hand them my laptop and tell them to do one and would if if I didnt have so much to lose. The expectation feels like I'm leaving of my own accord or I'm moving within the company which clearly I'm not. Having never been in this situation before what is a reasonable handover?

[Piersman2]

The minimum would be my answer. Don't go out of your way to be obnoxious, but you also don't need to go out of your way to detail everything either. It's up to those you're handing to to make sure they're up to speed , not you seeing as the company has decided they don't need you any longer.

Quite a few times, as a contractor, I've been asked to hand over to companies coming in to take over what I do. As far as I'm concerned I'm happy to answer any questions, and be helpful, informative and correct whilst doing this, but I'm not going to tell them what they should be doing, they should know that themselves if they are coming in to replace me.

[lunarscope]

Spydaman said:

So I've been made redundant after 21 years which I accept and will get a decent payout. The last thing before I leave is to handover to those that remain. Next week I've been tasked with handing over in detail everything I know about the product and customers. I'm I two minds to hand them my laptop and tell them to do one and would if if I didnt have so much to lose. The expectation feels like I'm leaving of my own accord or I'm moving within the company which clearly I'm not. Having never been in this situation before what is a reasonable handover?

I was made redundant and had to spend a month handing over to an Indian guy from our outsourcing 'partner'. I even had to create a handover training plan for this task. Not nice having to train someone to take your job ! He didn't understand a thing I showed him but simply said "yes" whenever I asked if he understood. Needless to say it all ended in tears and I was still getting asked for support two years later as had I managed to get another role within the company at the last minute (after I had received the redundancy cheque).

[MitchT]

I'd tell them "there's nothing to hand over, hence why you're making me redundant, but I can bob in and do some work on consultancy rates if you require".

lunarscope said:

I managed to get another role within the company at the last minute (after I had received the redundancy cheque).

How does that work then? I was under the impression that you had to pay the redundancy money back if you got another job in the same company within a certain amount of time.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

MitchT said:

I'd tell them "there's nothing to hand over, hence why you're making me redundant, but I can bob in and do some work on consultancy rates if you require".

lunarscope said:

I managed to get another role within the company at the last minute (after I had received the redundancy cheque).

How does that work then? I was under the impression that you had to pay the redundancy money back if you got another job in the same company within a certain amount of time.

I don't think so?

Internet says (and of course that's not forced to be correct )

An employee who is re-employed after having been made redundant can retain his or her statutory redundancy payment, whether or not he or she is immediately re-employed or returns to work for the same employer at a later date. However, under s.214 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the receipt of the redundancy payment will break the employee's continuity of employment for the purposes of the statutory redundancy pay scheme. Therefore, if the employee is made redundant again in the future, he or she will not be entitled to a statutory redundancy payment until he or she has accrued another two years' service. The statutory redundancy pay calculation will be based on the latter period of service only.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

OP

I'd say be as helpful as you possibly can. There's nothing to gain from doing the minimum (or less) and you never know in this life when your decent approach is remembered & rewarded.

[southendpier]

Spydaman said:

So I've been made redundant after 21 years which I accept and will get a decent payout. The last thing before I leave is to handover to those that remain. Next week I've been tasked with handing over in detail everything I know about the product and customers. I'm I two minds to hand them my laptop and tell them to do one and would if if I didnt have so much to lose. The expectation feels like I'm leaving of my own accord or I'm moving within the company which clearly I'm not. Having never been in this situation before what is a reasonable handover?

Roles are made redundant. Were you offered a chance of applying for the job your trainee is now doing? If not then you may want to consider a tribunal.

[Piersman2]

southendpier said:

Spydaman said:

So I've been made redundant after 21 years which I accept and will get a decent payout. The last thing before I leave is to handover to those that remain. Next week I've been tasked with handing over in detail everything I know about the product and customers. I'm I two minds to hand them my laptop and tell them to do one and would if if I didnt have so much to lose. The expectation feels like I'm leaving of my own accord or I'm moving within the company which clearly I'm not. Having never been in this situation before what is a reasonable handover?

Roles are made redundant. Were you offered a chance of applying for the job your trainee is now doing? If not then you may want to consider a tribunal.

I guess the role is still available, but in India!

[Spydaman]

The trainees are the remaining members of the department who are peers and my boss..

[MitchT]

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

I don't think so?

Internet says (and of course that's not forced to be correct )

An employee who is re-employed after having been made redundant can retain his or her statutory redundancy payment, whether or not he or she is immediately re-employed or returns to work for the same employer at a later date. However, under s.214 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the receipt of the redundancy payment will break the employee's continuity of employment for the purposes of the statutory redundancy pay scheme. Therefore, if the employee is made redundant again in the future, he or she will not be entitled to a statutory redundancy payment until he or she has accrued another two years' service. The statutory redundancy pay calculation will be based on the latter period of service only.

Thanks, that explains. I once knew someone who was made redundant and had to give back their payment, but was able to retain their continuous service as a result, so maybe that's what I'm getting it confused with. I don't know if there's a choice but I'd sooner take the payment and start my service from scratch.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

MitchT said:

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

I don't think so?

Internet says (and of course that's not forced to be correct )

An employee who is re-employed after having been made redundant can retain his or her statutory redundancy payment, whether or not he or she is immediately re-employed or returns to work for the same employer at a later date. However, under s.214 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the receipt of the redundancy payment will break the employee's continuity of employment for the purposes of the statutory redundancy pay scheme. Therefore, if the employee is made redundant again in the future, he or she will not be entitled to a statutory redundancy payment until he or she has accrued another two years' service. The statutory redundancy pay calculation will be based on the latter period of service only.

Thanks, that explains. I once knew someone who was made redundant and had to give back their payment, but was able to retain their continuous service as a result, so maybe that's what I'm getting it confused with. I don't know if there's a choice but I'd sooner take the payment and start my service from scratch.

Me too.

[southendpier]

Spydaman said:

The trainees are the remaining members of the department who are peers and my boss..

Were you put in a pool situation? Why were you chosen or did you volunteer?

[Spydaman]

No but not worth contesting according to my solicitor. Better to take the money and run.

[Steve Campbell]

I have just left a role / company after 27 years. I did my utmost (within reason !) to ensure my team and my peers had what they needed to be successful, because I respect them, & I treat others as I expect to be treated myself.

Those who are picking up the work probably had zero input to the decisions that have affected you....so why punish them, other than to get some kind of minor buzz from a "stuff you" moment....which will last a short time and may bite you back in the future (you never know when you will need help, a reference or support from those people who you hack off).

I walked out with head held high, and a level of respect from those around me and appreciation from my old team.

I agreed at the beginning with each of the "receiving" managers what they wanted and needed...then got on and gave it them to the best of my ability.

That's my take anyway.

Edited by Steve Campbell on Thursday 21st April 22:38

[southendpier]

Spydaman said:

No but not worth contesting according to my solicitor. Better to take the money and run.

That's an odd view since there are strict processes your employer must follow. They don't and you win.

[lunarscope]

MitchT said:

How does that work then? I was under the impression that you had to pay the redundancy money back if you got another job in the same company within a certain amount of time.

I received the cheque a few days before I was due to leave. I then had a new role offered in a different department (and country !) at the last minute so had to hand back the cheque. It did mean that I had continuous employment but was then made redundant again four years later and had enhanced (double) terms, which was an improvement.

[ikarl]

I'd sit and happily train them, and be really enthusiastic about it.... I'm not saying I would train them in the 'right' thing....but they'd get some training

[andye30m3]

I got made redundant about 5 years or so ago, a long with 2 other people.

One walked straight out of the door and was never seen again
another went straight to the pub got pissed, went home and was never seen again

I worked for about 3 or 4 days of my months notice in order to provide a reasonable hand over of the projects I was working on.

I had my job back within 6 months when things started to pick up and the others didn't, jobs were not all that easy to find at the time and I'm quite sure a sensible approach to making sure I didn't bugger them about did me no harm in the long run.

[Vaud]

Quite. Never burn bridges.

[elanfan]

Isn't there some bug that's going around that will lay you low next week?