Client left - but I can't be made redundant - why?
Discussion
Asking for a friend here: She has worked for a large motoring organisation for 32 years and was on a team which provided concierge services to a major manufacturer. The manufacturer has pulled its contract and so now 3 people are out of a job. My friend would like redundancy but the company don't want to give it to her and want to put back in a job she did not like from 3 yrs ago.
Do they have to offer redeployment or redundancy? At the moment it's redeployment or she just has to leave.
I did some research and they legally have to give here about £13k but this is the statutory minimum and a colleague recently walked away with around £40k (same salary).
Do they have to offer redeployment or redundancy? At the moment it's redeployment or she just has to leave.
I did some research and they legally have to give here about £13k but this is the statutory minimum and a colleague recently walked away with around £40k (same salary).
Frimley111R said:
Asking for a friend here: She has worked for a large motoring organisation for 32 years and was on a team which provided concierge services to a major manufacturer. The manufacturer has pulled its contract and so now 3 people are out of a job. My friend would like redundancy but the company don't want to give it to her and want to put back in a job she did not like from 3 yrs ago.
Do they have to offer redeployment or redundancy? At the moment it's redeployment or she just has to leave.
I did some research and they legally have to give here about £13k but this is the statutory minimum and a colleague recently walked away with around £40k (same salary).
Sounds like they want her to leave of her own accord, rather than pay redundancy based on the 32 years of service.Do they have to offer redeployment or redundancy? At the moment it's redeployment or she just has to leave.
I did some research and they legally have to give here about £13k but this is the statutory minimum and a colleague recently walked away with around £40k (same salary).
Mandat said:
Frimley111R said:
Asking for a friend here: She has worked for a large motoring organisation for 32 years and was on a team which provided concierge services to a major manufacturer. The manufacturer has pulled its contract and so now 3 people are out of a job. My friend would like redundancy but the company don't want to give it to her and want to put back in a job she did not like from 3 yrs ago.
Do they have to offer redeployment or redundancy? At the moment it's redeployment or she just has to leave.
I did some research and they legally have to give here about £13k but this is the statutory minimum and a colleague recently walked away with around £40k (same salary).
Sounds like they want her to leave of her own accord, rather than pay redundancy based on the 32 years of service.Do they have to offer redeployment or redundancy? At the moment it's redeployment or she just has to leave.
I did some research and they legally have to give here about £13k but this is the statutory minimum and a colleague recently walked away with around £40k (same salary).
Mandat said:
Sounds like they want her to leave of her own accord, rather than pay redundancy based on the 32 years of service.
Exactly this - and also (as above) there is no right to redundancy. I can understand why the company are doing this - it's damage limitation, despite it being irritating for your friend.Is the move they are proposing a demotion? There's a slim chance of a constructive dismissal claim - although I'd not recommend this route.
if her job is similar to the other people's jobs, afaik the organisation would have to enter a consultation period which she'd be part of. They can choose the criteria for who passes the consultation, but everywhere I've been, if someone puts their hand up they will be selected for the redundancy over other people in the consultation.
If that fails she'd have to claim constructive dismissal if the new role is different enough from her old role, but that is a lot of work and heartache
If that fails she'd have to claim constructive dismissal if the new role is different enough from her old role, but that is a lot of work and heartache
It will all hinge on how different the other role is. It may not be identical but if it’s substantially the same then they are entitled to redeploy rather than offer redundancy.
If there is a greater difference between the two (as sounds like it might be the case) then they will be offering “suitable alternative employment” but the employee can decline if it’s not suitable.
https://www.acas.org.uk/your-rights-during-redunda...
If there is a greater difference between the two (as sounds like it might be the case) then they will be offering “suitable alternative employment” but the employee can decline if it’s not suitable.
https://www.acas.org.uk/your-rights-during-redunda...
Frimley111R said:
My friend would like redundancy but the company don't want to give it to her and want to put back in a job she did not like from 3 yrs ago.
Is the job they are offering at the same site as the current one? If not, and it is a significant distance away, then my recollection from some time ago is that it is effectively making them redundant.trevalvole said:
Frimley111R said:
My friend would like redundancy but the company don't want to give it to her and want to put back in a job she did not like from 3 yrs ago.
Is the job they are offering at the same site as the current one? If not, and it is a significant distance away, then my recollection from some time ago is that it is effectively making them redundant.What are the plans for your wife's retirement?
A lot of things to consider based on many factors.
Her age, pension options with the company, prospects for other jobs within the company to name three.
Look at all possible outcomes and decide on how to work with these. Accept the new post as a safety measure to rack up service benefits whilst looking for transfers etc.
A mate in the company I worked for wanted to retire but get redundancy as part of the package. Not a necessitybut the terms were very desirable. We discussed it and came up with a plan. Basically, make himself surplus to requirements by training staff to take on parts of his job, farm out work to others, then go his boss to say he was surplus so "you don't need me, make me redundant". His position was effectively removed, the job ceased to exist. He left with satisfactory terms. Took him a couple of years to achieve.
I did similar involving a move to another job as I wanted to reach a particular milestone that would improve my finances if I could get redundancy. I got lucky and managed it. Retired early with a good package and got a job elsewhere to generate an income until final retirement when I wanted it.
This was in the tobacco industry and the prospect of extended employment was dwindling anyway. The signs were pretty obvious. The factory I was at closed 2 years after I left. A culture was developing where deciding when and how to leave was important.
A lot of things to consider based on many factors.
Her age, pension options with the company, prospects for other jobs within the company to name three.
Look at all possible outcomes and decide on how to work with these. Accept the new post as a safety measure to rack up service benefits whilst looking for transfers etc.
A mate in the company I worked for wanted to retire but get redundancy as part of the package. Not a necessitybut the terms were very desirable. We discussed it and came up with a plan. Basically, make himself surplus to requirements by training staff to take on parts of his job, farm out work to others, then go his boss to say he was surplus so "you don't need me, make me redundant". His position was effectively removed, the job ceased to exist. He left with satisfactory terms. Took him a couple of years to achieve.
I did similar involving a move to another job as I wanted to reach a particular milestone that would improve my finances if I could get redundancy. I got lucky and managed it. Retired early with a good package and got a job elsewhere to generate an income until final retirement when I wanted it.
This was in the tobacco industry and the prospect of extended employment was dwindling anyway. The signs were pretty obvious. The factory I was at closed 2 years after I left. A culture was developing where deciding when and how to leave was important.
Inbox said:
From my recollection you aren't entitled to redundancy, if voluntary is offered you could apply for it but they don't have to grant it.
This 
The last time our company made redundancies and asked for volunteers first, a number of long serving employees thought it was a great opportunity to leave the company and get paid a good sum for it.
They applied for redundancy and started talking as if it was automatic that they would get it.
Whilst it may have been the case that they just didn't want to pay out big sums of redundancy payments, they rejected all of the long term employees requests, stating that they didn't want to lose the more experienced workers, as it would be more detrimental to the company.
Instead, they selected volunteers who had been with the company for a much shorter time (along with a couple of people who the company had had issues with in the past, such as time keeping an attendance issues, and disciplinary issues)
4rephill said:
Inbox said:
From my recollection you aren't entitled to redundancy, if voluntary is offered you could apply for it but they don't have to grant it.
This The last time our company made redundancies and asked for volunteers first, a number of long serving employees thought it was a great opportunity to leave the company and get paid a good sum for it.
They applied for redundancy and started talking as if it was automatic that they would get it.
Whilst it may have been the case that they just didn't want to pay out big sums of redundancy payments, they rejected all of the long term employees requests, stating that they didn't want to lose the more experienced workers, as it would be more detrimental to the company.
Instead, they selected volunteers who had been with the company for a much shorter time (along with a couple of people who the company had had issues with in the past, such as time keeping an attendance issues, and disciplinary issues)
Pica-Pica said:
4rephill said:
Inbox said:
From my recollection you aren't entitled to redundancy, if voluntary is offered you could apply for it but they don't have to grant it.
This The last time our company made redundancies and asked for volunteers first, a number of long serving employees thought it was a great opportunity to leave the company and get paid a good sum for it.
They applied for redundancy and started talking as if it was automatic that they would get it.
Whilst it may have been the case that they just didn't want to pay out big sums of redundancy payments, they rejected all of the long term employees requests, stating that they didn't want to lose the more experienced workers, as it would be more detrimental to the company.
Instead, they selected volunteers who had been with the company for a much shorter time (along with a couple of people who the company had had issues with in the past, such as time keeping an attendance issues, and disciplinary issues)
One factor to consider is if the job itself is being lost/removed. Simply making the jobholder redundant compulsorily then replacing them in the same role is a no-go. It can become more complex if the person moved out goes to replace someone else in a different role. Person A is leaving, person B is transferred to replace them leaving a gap that B used to occupy. The company can then either replace B or simply do away with the position. This seems to be similar to what the OP describes. A contract was lost and staff involved in running that were no longer needed to do so. The role was lost and the staff transferred elsewhere. Saves paying out redundancy and fills a possible shortfall elsewhere.
It would be interesting to see how this progresses.
The company I worked for appeared to use some transfers to a dodgy location overseas as a way of getting people to leave voluntarily. I factored this in when making my decisions re leaving.
"Go now with ok terms or play a waiting game in the hope of getting a result in the future?"
It would be interesting to see how this progresses.
The company I worked for appeared to use some transfers to a dodgy location overseas as a way of getting people to leave voluntarily. I factored this in when making my decisions re leaving.
"Go now with ok terms or play a waiting game in the hope of getting a result in the future?"
E-bmw said:
Pica-Pica said:
4rephill said:
Inbox said:
From my recollection you aren't entitled to redundancy, if voluntary is offered you could apply for it but they don't have to grant it.
This The last time our company made redundancies and asked for volunteers first, a number of long serving employees thought it was a great opportunity to leave the company and get paid a good sum for it.
They applied for redundancy and started talking as if it was automatic that they would get it.
Whilst it may have been the case that they just didn't want to pay out big sums of redundancy payments, they rejected all of the long term employees requests, stating that they didn't want to lose the more experienced workers, as it would be more detrimental to the company.
Instead, they selected volunteers who had been with the company for a much shorter time (along with a couple of people who the company had had issues with in the past, such as time keeping an attendance issues, and disciplinary issues)
There is no automatic right to redundancy. If a company wants to make people redundant they can do so and choose who is in that pot based on their own procedures as long as it impacts on less than 20 people. Once at 20 and above proper consultations are required. Most contracts will only mention redundancy if there is a contractual enhanced right.
If the work of a team disappears as here then a sensible company will first look at if it can redeploy people to other roles with similar skills required etc to avoid letting people go. It sounds like your friends company has a small number of people impacted and has chosen to make the most cost effective choice when it comes to who is made redundant. They can absolutely do that if its a small number and they can absolutely offer her a "comparable" job and it doesnt matter if she hated that job previously. If the job is miles away, significantly more junior or anything else that means its not suitable and comparable then its a different conversation. She would only be entitled to statutory redundancy unless her contract mentions enhanced or enhanced has already been announced as the solution.
TUPE mentioned above does not apply as this is a case of losing business not selling business.
With no automatic right to redundancy she can of course leave and find another role or if she really wants to get annoying she can ask for what criteria was used and then start to look at whether she should have been made redundant. Not something that I would advise. Suck it up or leave really the options.
If the work of a team disappears as here then a sensible company will first look at if it can redeploy people to other roles with similar skills required etc to avoid letting people go. It sounds like your friends company has a small number of people impacted and has chosen to make the most cost effective choice when it comes to who is made redundant. They can absolutely do that if its a small number and they can absolutely offer her a "comparable" job and it doesnt matter if she hated that job previously. If the job is miles away, significantly more junior or anything else that means its not suitable and comparable then its a different conversation. She would only be entitled to statutory redundancy unless her contract mentions enhanced or enhanced has already been announced as the solution.
TUPE mentioned above does not apply as this is a case of losing business not selling business.
With no automatic right to redundancy she can of course leave and find another role or if she really wants to get annoying she can ask for what criteria was used and then start to look at whether she should have been made redundant. Not something that I would advise. Suck it up or leave really the options.
Edited by craigjm on Wednesday 17th December 18:13
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff