Suitable alternative employment
Discussion
A quick sense check for a friend regarding a site move from a central location in a city to the outskirts approximately 5 miles away.
Large employer.
Low paid individuals, many commute via bus, train, cycle.
Employer to pay additional travel costs for 12 months.
Deemed to be SAE at new site so no redundancy offer(s)
All employees who have not accepted that the move is SAE (mainly public transport related issues, multiple connections etc) have been told it is unreasonable to reject the move on these grounds alone and therefore have been offered redundancy without redundancy pay.
Whether a job is suitable depends on:
How similar the work is to your current job (similar if not identical roles)
The terms of the job being offered (all moving on existing contracts)
Your skills, abilities and circumstances in relation to the job
The pay (including benefits), status, hours and location (all the same bar location)
That is not to say that terms, hours, roles could/would not be changed after the move. I suppose the question is; is it reasonable to expect people to double their commute time or distance and incur increased travel costs longer term. Given the nature of the unskilled minimum pay roles performed, transport to and from work plays a significant part in affordability.
?
Large employer.
Low paid individuals, many commute via bus, train, cycle.
Employer to pay additional travel costs for 12 months.
Deemed to be SAE at new site so no redundancy offer(s)
All employees who have not accepted that the move is SAE (mainly public transport related issues, multiple connections etc) have been told it is unreasonable to reject the move on these grounds alone and therefore have been offered redundancy without redundancy pay.
Whether a job is suitable depends on:
How similar the work is to your current job (similar if not identical roles)
The terms of the job being offered (all moving on existing contracts)
Your skills, abilities and circumstances in relation to the job
The pay (including benefits), status, hours and location (all the same bar location)
That is not to say that terms, hours, roles could/would not be changed after the move. I suppose the question is; is it reasonable to expect people to double their commute time or distance and incur increased travel costs longer term. Given the nature of the unskilled minimum pay roles performed, transport to and from work plays a significant part in affordability.
?
Edited by smalle on Tuesday 19th June 10:39
sma said:
A quick sense check for a friend regarding a site move from a central location in a city to the outskirts approximately 5 miles away.
Large employer.
Low paid individuals, many commute via bus, train, cycle.
Employer to pay additional travel costs for 12 months.
Deemed to be SAE at new site so no redundancy offer(s)
All employees who have not accepted that the move is SAE (mainly public transport related issues, multiple connections etc) have been told it is unreasonable to reject the move on these grounds alone and therefore have been offered redundancy without redundancy pay.
Whether a job is suitable depends on:
How similar the work is to your current job (similar if not identical roles)
The terms of the job being offered (all moving on existing contracts)
Your skills, abilities and circumstances in relation to the job
The pay (including benefits), status, hours and location (all the same bar location)
That is not to say that terms, hours, roles could/would not be changed after the move. I suppose the question is; is it reasonable to expect people to double their commute time or distance and incur increased travel costs longer term. Given the nature of the unskilled minimum pay roles performed, transport to and from work plays a significant part in affordability.
?
A commute doubling from 2 miles to 4 miles would be fine. One from 20 miles to 40 miles, far less so. Large employer.
Low paid individuals, many commute via bus, train, cycle.
Employer to pay additional travel costs for 12 months.
Deemed to be SAE at new site so no redundancy offer(s)
All employees who have not accepted that the move is SAE (mainly public transport related issues, multiple connections etc) have been told it is unreasonable to reject the move on these grounds alone and therefore have been offered redundancy without redundancy pay.
Whether a job is suitable depends on:
How similar the work is to your current job (similar if not identical roles)
The terms of the job being offered (all moving on existing contracts)
Your skills, abilities and circumstances in relation to the job
The pay (including benefits), status, hours and location (all the same bar location)
That is not to say that terms, hours, roles could/would not be changed after the move. I suppose the question is; is it reasonable to expect people to double their commute time or distance and incur increased travel costs longer term. Given the nature of the unskilled minimum pay roles performed, transport to and from work plays a significant part in affordability.
?
Given that I suspect most workers don't live outside the gates of the current location, a move to an out of town location just a few miles away seems reasonable to me, especially with the offer of covering additional transport for a time.
Moving to another town maybe 10-15 miles away would not.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff