Possible sacking on medical grounds

[The Leaper]

It's not the person that becomes redundant, it's the job itself. Illness and dismissal on these grounds means that employment will not be lost due to redundancy but due to the employee's inability to carry out the tasks of the job. A compromise agreement looks irrelevant.

R.

[davepoth]

The Leaper said:

It's not the person that becomes redundant, it's the job itself. Illness and dismissal on these grounds means that employment will not be lost due to redundancy but due to the employee's inability to carry out the tasks of the job. A compromise agreement looks irrelevant.

R.

None of the agreements I've been involved with related to redundancy, they were all dismissals.

[Vaud]

The Leaper said:

A compromise agreement looks irrelevant.

Depends on the industry. Some use it as a mechanism to avoid conflict with the unions. Our company uses them extensively. Dismissal for us is for misconduct, not illness and we factor the relatively low costs into our business model.

Better to settle for x months payment and "no fault".

Also mitigates the risk of tribunal.

[Jasandjules]

swerni said:

I would imagine that, if you were sacked for gross misconduct, they wouldn't have to pay you anything at all ( assumption having not seen your contract)

Gross Misconduct is a violation of a fundamental term of the contract of employment breaking it. That means no redundancy pay, no notice etc as you are in breach and are not entitled to enforcement of any of those terms.

In your shoes OP I would ask for a Without Prejudice meeting and say she will resign but would like an enhanced reference..... It is better to resign than to be sacked.

[mattyn1]

Jasandjules said:

Gross Misconduct is a violation of a fundamental term of the contract of employment breaking it. That means no redundancy pay, no notice etc as you are in breach and are not entitled to enforcement of any of those terms.

In your shoes OP I would ask for a Without Prejudice meeting and say she will resign but would like an enhanced reference..... It is better to resign than to be sacked.

This is the plan, and sits nicely with us. Well her, as she is having that meeting tomorrow, over the phone. I think there might be a final face to face on Friday, but I/we are assuming that will be to close it all off.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

swerni said:

Vaud said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Financially, definitely go for a sacking over redundancy. Depending on her length of service, they will almost certainly have to give her more notice than she will have to give them, and whilst she will have to work her notice, if they sack her they will almost certainly want her to go immediately but of course still have to pay her in full for her notice period.

If I resigned, I'd have to work a months notice, whereas if I was sacked, I wouldn't have to work and they'd have to pay me 3 months notice.

Financially, go for a compromise agreement!

^^^^^
This.
Twig your comments are very assumptive. How can you make that statement with no kno?ledge at all of her contract ?

Length of service for many companies has no bearing on notice period at all.
I would say the notice period is the same buration both ways between both parties in most instances.

As she isn't getting sacked for misconduct, but due to poor attendance (for genuine illness), any sacking will most likely come with the same notice period as would be given in redundancy. And that is linked to length of service.

[edc]

The notice period is the notice period. It isn't any more or less because it is one form of dismissal over another. The exception being gross misconduct with no notice dismissal.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

swerni said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

As she isn't getting sacked for misconduct, but due to poor attendance (for genuine illness), any sacking will most likely come with the same notice period as would be given in redundancy. And that is linked to length of service.

Again assumptive.
In the last 27 years of working I've only once had a notice period linked to length of service.
Redundancy clearly is linked to length of service.

Are you now saying she is financially better off with redundancy ?


( clearly all irrelevant and hypothetical )

She isn't being offered redundancy, so it isn't an option. The choice is sacked or resign. In my experience, someone sacked for genuine health reasons would be paid the same notice period as someone who is being made redundant. Regardless of the contract. It's just the decent thing to do. So a long serving employee would get 3 months, and not have to work it. Whereas if you resign, you have to work the notice period which could be a lot less.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

swerni said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

So a long serving employee would get 3 months

No they wouldn't!
They would get what ever their contracted stated, just because yours states 3 months, it doesn't mean others do.
Length of service in many organisations has no bearing on notice period.
The vast majority of the population will have a 4 week notice period.

If they treated the sacking as a redundancy as far as notice period goes, why wouldn't a long serving employee get 3 months. Isn't redundancy notice period linked to service?? I realise they might not treat is as a sacking, but if they did, which is the point I'm making.

[Vaud]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

If they treated the sacking as a redundancy as far as notice period goes, why wouldn't a long serving employee get 3 months. Isn't redundancy notice period linked to service?? I realise they might not treat is as a sacking, but if they did, which is the point I'm making.

Stat. rights here:

https://www.gov.uk/redundant-your-rights/overview

[edc]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

If they treated the sacking as a redundancy as far as notice period goes, why wouldn't a long serving employee get 3 months. Isn't redundancy notice period linked to service?? I realise they might not treat is as a sacking, but if they did, which is the point I'm making.

I think you are getting confused. The contracts States the notice period. In the absence of that there is the statutory notice period which goes up to 12 weeks. As already mentioned there is no special "redundancy notice period linked to service". Your statutory redundancy payment is calculated partly based on length of service.