Paying back redundancy money - legal?

[MattW]

Hi all

Just wondering if there is anyone out there who could offer me a little advice on an HR issue. Ultimately I don't think I have a leg to stand on but I would like to check it with some experts if I can.

I was made redundant in June 2010 from company A, who gave me a nice cheque and continued to pay me for 3 months whilst on gardening leave for until I started a new job with company B (with a nice pay rise) at the end of August (cannot remember the exact dates at the moment).

Old boss at Company A was one of the few who survived the redundancies and ended up in another part of Company A but in the same function. Old boss then approaches me to return to Company A in a new role; after sorting out the finer details I accept (closer to home more money) and start back with Company A in April 2011.

Now I know many people say never go back, but for me this has been great, I never wanted to leave Company A, hated Company B and ultimately have gone back to Company A on a salary that would have taken me a good 5 years (minimum) to have achieved (short of a promotion) had I not been made redundant.

All ok so far but then this is where it gets a little confusing and I want to be sure that I am not being stitched up by HR.

Basically there are two points I am having difficulty dealing with:

1) I am not allowed to re-enter my old pension plan (final salary) and must enter a new plan (cashbuilder) as I am now a 'new' employee

2) As I was not out of the company for 12months I have to pay back a proportion of my redundancy cheque roughly 5/12ths of the money paid

Now my biggest issue is how can they treat me as 'new' employee on the pension front but an old employee in terms of the redundancy monies paid - surely if they want there cash back then I should be entitled to my old pension plan?

Appreciate that view may be simplistic but I do feel as if they are being a little devious here - if its all above board then fair enough it was my choice to come back after all and I knew the stipulations before I excepted the role. But is it legal, can they actually enforce this?

I refused to cough up all the cash up front as I am not sure they are allowed to do this, so they are taking an instalment from my pay over the next 12months.

Many thanks for any help you can provide.

Matt

[pugwash4x4]

They can't have their cake and eat it.

You don't make a Person redundant, you make their position redundant. Are you doing exactly the same job?

If you aren't then clearly they have made you redundant, and just happen to have employed a new person in a different role.

If you are doing the same role, then they didn't really make you redundant.....

[zippy3x]

this :

http://www.redundancyforum.co.uk/employees-ask-red...

would seem to imply that they are taking the piss

[Rude-boy]

Don't have anything that I can really add to this other than to say do not forget that it was your position that was made redundant, not you. This is important, as the other responder has said because what your 'new' role is will help you see which angle of attack you should come from.

I would also ask them why they think that can treat one area of your employment differently from the other.

[MattW]

Thanks for the replies so far.

To confirm they made my role redundant, the new role whilst in the same field is in a different part of the company. The old role still no longer exists.

[MattW]

zippy3x said:

this :

http://www.redundancyforum.co.uk/employees-ask-red...

would seem to imply that they are taking the piss

Thanks for this.

Providing there is no agreement on the contrary to preserve continuity of service, your service will normally be broken. Normally there should be a clear calendar-week break (starting on a Sunday) between the termination of one period of employment and the commencement of the new period however your employer may err on the side of caution and make this period longer.


Hmmm....think I better carry on trawling through the very long and dull redundancy guidelines; there must be a relevant section in there somewhere.......if so I presume I am screwed?

[pugwash4x4]

MattW said:

Thanks for this.

Providing there is no agreement on the contrary to preserve continuity of service, your service will normally be broken. Normally there should be a clear calendar-week break (starting on a Sunday) between the termination of one period of employment and the commencement of the new period however your employer may err on the side of caution and make this period longer.


Hmmm....think I better carry on trawling through the very long and dull redundancy guidelines; there must be a relevant section in there somewhere.......if so I presume I am screwed?

screwed? what do you mean?

that suggests either you keep AL your redundancy pay, or they admit they never made you redundant and you get your old pension back- and i'd suggest the contributions they didn't make during that period.

[MattW]

pugwash4x4 said:

screwed? what do you mean?

that suggests either you keep AL your redundancy pay, or they admit they never made you redundant and you get your old pension back- and i'd suggest the contributions they didn't make during that period.

Sorry, I mean if there is a clause in the redundancy t&c's then I don't get anything i.e. Company A have expanded their re-employment period beyound 1 week to 1 year.

[randlemarcus]

MattW said:

Sorry, I mean if there is a clause in the redundancy t&c's then I don't get anything i.e. Company A have expanded their re-employment period beyound 1 week to 1 year.

In which case, please can you come back into the Final Salary Pension scheme, thankyouverymuch.

As said before, it can be a case of eating and yet having ones sticky buns.

[MattW]

Ok found the relevant wording in the Redundancy Information Pack, presume this would imply that I am stuck in terms of paying back some of the redundancy cash, but there is no mention anywhere of how this affects my 'old' pension - which at the end of the day is the more important element to me.


Re-employment with Company A following receipt of redundancy payment

It is the Company’s usual practice not to accept employment services provided by yourself either directly or through a third party for a period of twelve months commencing from the date your contract of employment was formally terminated. However, should a job opportunity present itself which is ideally suited to your experiences and work requirements the management may at its discretion consider an application from you subject to you repaying a proportion of the redundancy payment on re-engagement. The amount of the redundancy money to be repaid will be determined by the Company’s management.

[phil-sti]

The pension bit is correct but the redundancy bit seems wrong. Reason I think this is because you can't employ in the same position for 6 months, so why would they suggest 12 months. Plus is this wasn't pointed out on your job offer then you could say that you wouldn't of accepted position.

[phil-sti]

The pension bit is correct but the redundancy bit seems wrong. Reason I think this is because you can't employ in the same position for 6 months, so why would they suggest 12 months. Plus is this wasn't pointed out on your job offer then you could say that you wouldn't of accepted position.

[edc]

MattW said:

pugwash4x4 said:

screwed? what do you mean?

that suggests either you keep AL your redundancy pay, or they admit they never made you redundant and you get your old pension back- and i'd suggest the contributions they didn't make during that period.

Sorry, I mean if there is a clause in the redundancy t&c's then I don't get anything i.e. Company A have expanded their re-employment period beyound 1 week to 1 year.

What are these "redundancy T&Cs" you refer to?

[MattW]

edc said:

What are these "redundancy T&Cs" you refer to?

The clause from the redundnacy guide that I quoted in my last post (above).

[edc]

MattW said:

The clause from the redundnacy guide that I quoted in my last post (above).

So this "guide" is non contractual? At the point of rejoining the company what documents and terms were in force as part your offer? What other conditions were specified as part of the new offer? Did you sign a compromise agreement on your exit from the business?

[don4l]

MattW said:

The old role still no longer exists.

You've answered your question, haven't you?

It sounds like your old position was made redundant.

Some people that you worked with had a lot of respect for you... they got you another job.

Instead of being grateful, you are worried about your "rights".

Sheesh!


Don
--

[Eric Mc]

No need for that.

The company are being VERY cheeky from what I can see.

If they didn't have the good sense to re-allocate the individual to a new position in the firm whilst he was still there, they smack of poor management to me.

Why should the employee be penalised for their poor decision making?

[Fer]

Eric Mc said:

Why should the employee be penalised for their poor decision making?

Good point.

[MattW]

don4l said:

You've answered your question, haven't you?

It sounds like your old position was made redundant.

Some people that you worked with had a lot of respect for you... they got you another job.

Instead of being grateful, you are worried about your "rights".

Sheesh!


Don
--

Yes and why shouldn't I be when they are asking me to pay back money they gave me due to redundancy whilst simultaneously saying I am a new employee so must take up a new pension scheme that is not as good as the old one. At the end of the day the key thing for me in this is my pension rights, I am not overly concerned about the money either way.

Ultimately I am grateful for the role but I have the full backing of my boss in this line of enquiry as she believes HR are out of order on this as well. This is a big multinational company where HR is very detached department; there is little love lost for them throughout the business.

[MattW]

edc said:

So this "guide" is non contractual? At the point of rejoining the company what documents and terms were in force as part your offer? What other conditions were specified as part of the new offer? Did you sign a compromise agreement on your exit from the business?

I need to check this. I do not believe I signed anything prior to leaving the company the first time around but I was made aware of the restrictions prior to accepting the role when I came back, so I do appreciate that this may be where any case I have falls down – if that is the case then so be it.

There is another aspect to this that annoys me and that is, that had the companies policies been correctly followed by HR in the first place then I should arguably have never left the company as there was a role I should have been considered for in their redeployment process but due to HR people being off sick it was never properly followed up on their behalf and I secured the new role and came to the end of my gardening leave having heard very little from them.

In fact I only had one peace of communication from them about the role. They left a message for me to call them, which I did, there was no answer so I left a message, for which I never received a reply – apparently this was because the handling HR agent was off sick.

I did try explaining this before I started and that in a reasonable world they would accept that they did not follow there own process and would therefore grant me access to my old pension but they (HR) brushed this off and made out it was no big deal and it would not give me any access to my old pension.