Constructive Dismissal

[davek_964]

edc said:

Vaud said:

edc said:

Why would the company pay this if it is a redundancy situation and which could cost a lot less than this?

Senior female role. US company who may have handled things poorly to date. Risk of litigation, etc... a compromise agreement will probably cost them less than even a minor part of the costs of their retained legal advice.

In my experience, most senior roles are handled through compromise agreements (as a peer, not as a lawyer). It's just easier on all sides.

Unless there is some underlying discrimination then whilst I agree some companies prefer to use a settlement agreement, the reason here would still be redundancy, and there is no need for them to pay such a large sum of 18+ months.

Perhaps it depends on industry, but at least in mine it's very uncommon for companies to pay statutory minimum especially for senior people.
I was made redundant a couple of years ago (similar story actually, US company closing UK offices) and was paid roughly a month per year for 16 years service and there were people who had been there longer. I have friends / ex-colleagues who were made redundant by a different company who were paid even more.

[Vaud]

davek_964 said:

Perhaps it depends on industry, but at least in mine it's very uncommon for companies to pay statutory minimum especially for senior people.
I was made redundant a couple of years ago (similar story actually, US company closing UK offices) and was paid roughly a month per year for 16 years service and there were people who had been there longer. I have friends / ex-colleagues who were made redundant by a different company who were paid even more.

That is my experience. Starting positions are around 1 month/year + ex gratia payment.

The worst I know of is 6 months. The best, 24 months + a massive top up to their pension. These are mid level roles, not execs/directors.