Redundancy worth fighting?

[Crusoe]

In oil and gas so not a surprise but wonder if I have a case worth fighting on the grounds of being unfair. Few pointers from anyone in employment law or similar would be greatly appreciated.

HR claim that I don't need to be scored against my peers in other countries as they are closing the UK group. I can see why they would want to argue that as if I was scored against people doing similar jobs in other countries I would expect to get a better result and be staying (greater experience, longer service, better skills etc).

All the others report one level below me but ultimately to the same manager as me and they are all funded from the same resource, we also share work with jobs others can't complete coming to me and them providing some holiday cover etc. When I go my job will be divided up with those in other countries.

Would I be correct in thinking that they all need to be considered to make it a fair UK process or can they just say there is nobody to compare me to in the UK and not have to do any justification?

Thanks for any help, if it is worth fighting I have 4 days to appeal.

[Mutley]

You'll have better luck in "Employment Matters"

[Monty Python]

As long as the company had followed the proper redundancy procedure there's not a lot you can do:

http://www.landaulaw.co.uk/redundancy/

If it was just you that was being made redundant then you may have a case, but in this case it sounds like the entire UK operation is closing.

[Crusoe]

Rest of the engineering group still there, just the support group they were closing. Talks about the process being fair and transparent, if they didn't consider closing the other groups and leaving mine open or comparison of team members in similar roles in other locations that would be taking over the work is it unfair?

[PoleDriver]

ACAS helped me get very good deals on two occasions in the past. They can also recommend your best course of action taking into account your/the company situation.

[Crusoe]

site said:

There is no requirement for a selection pool if your employer closes its whole business (although there may be a requirement for a pool where an employer closes just one of its sites).

So a selection pool if one site from three were closed for certain functions would seem to be required. Might as well appeal and see what happens based on that. Thanks for the link.

[Russwhitehouse]

SS7?

[anonymous-user]

Crusoe said:

In oil and gas so not a surprise but wonder if I have a case worth fighting on the grounds of being unfair. Few pointers from anyone in employment law or similar would be greatly appreciated.

HR claim that I don't need to be scored against my peers in other countries as they are closing the UK group. I can see why they would want to argue that as if I was scored against people doing similar jobs in other countries I would expect to get a better result and be staying (greater experience, longer service, better skills etc).

All the others report one level below me but ultimately to the same manager as me and they are all funded from the same resource, we also share work with jobs others can't complete coming to me and them providing some holiday cover etc. When I go my job will be divided up with those in other countries.

Would I be correct in thinking that they all need to be considered to make it a fair UK process or can they just say there is nobody to compare me to in the UK and not have to do any justification?

Thanks for any help, if it is worth fighting I have 4 days to appeal.

This might help.


"Redundancy - a legal definition

What is redundancy?
An employee is dismissed for redundancy, and may qualify for redundancy pay, if the following conditions are satisfied:

the employer has ceased, or intends to cease continuing the business, or
the requirements for employees to perform work of a specific type or to conduct it at the location in which they are employed has ceased or diminished.
For collective consultation purposes only there is a different definition of "redundancy".

A redundancy therefore applies where the workforce is reorganised and there is:

less work, and/or;
changes in conditions that result in the new job being quite different from the old one, and/or;
work put out to contract by the employer – in which case there may be a TUPE transfer.
The test for redundancy is whether the employer requires fewer (or no) workers to do work of a specific kind at a particular location and not just whether the work itself has ceased or diminished.

Section 139 (Employment Relations Act, 1996) which defines rights to redundancy pay, makes direct reference to an employee’s "place of employment" as the test for whether or not the dismissal is for redundancy.

Though many employment contracts contain mobility clauses this does not necessarily mean an employee cannot be made redundant when their own work ceases. Consequently, when employees work at one location, they may be entitled to claim redundancy pay when that work ceases, even if their contract stipulates that they can be required to work at alternative locations."

I doubt very much that your employer would need to consider people in other countries.

[Crusoe]

Russwhitehouse said:

SS7?

no but think everyone is in the same boat just now if they are indirect cost.

[GT03ROB]

Crusoe said:

site said:

There is no requirement for a selection pool if your employer closes its whole business (although there may be a requirement for a pool where an employer closes just one of its sites).

So a selection pool if one site from three were closed for certain functions would seem to be required. Might as well appeal and see what happens based on that. Thanks for the link.

If the other sites are overseas the company will argue it is a different company, which it almost certainly is, therefore the multiple sites argument may not apply. The foreign sites would be covered by redundancy laws in their respective countries assuming the employees there were employees of a company registered in that country.

[Crusoe]

If all overseen by the same management and funded from the same parent group that can probably be argued against. Appeal in so see what happens.

[Kermit power]

Crusoe said:

If all overseen by the same management and funded from the same parent group that can probably be argued against. Appeal in so see what happens.

I'd be surprised if that's the case?

I work for a huge multinational, and when we have redundancies, they are always treated on a completely ring-fenced basis, to the extent that assignees in from another country will be automatically out of scope.

[GT03ROB]

Crusoe said:

If all overseen by the same management and funded from the same parent group that can probably be argued against. Appeal in so see what happens.

Keep us posted & good luck.

But don;t get your hopes up. I work for a multinational & when redundancy occurs it's done on a country by country basis. Each company within the group will be registered in a different country & must comply with the labour laws in that country. As part of a UK redundancy consultation process you could certainly suggest that you move to another location in a different country if there are openings there as a mitigation of the redundancy process.

[Jasandjules]

Crusoe said:

If all overseen by the same management and funded from the same parent group that can probably be argued against. Appeal in so see what happens.

Also note that suitable alternative positions can be from any group company. Also relocation may be reasonable if you are willing to do so.