Employment law type question - taking redundancy

[MagicalTrevor]

I'm in the situation where my job is being moved an extra 1 hour away (on top of my 45 min commute). This is too far so I've looked elsewhere for work and have been offered a new job. The job move is to take place on the 1st June but the new job will actually start part way through June.

My natural instinct is to hand my notice in and leave normally however a colleague has said that I could take redundancy (of my notice period) instead. This would obviously mean leaving on June 1st, but with 4 weeks redundancy money in my pocket, whereas handing my notice in will simply mean leaving part way through June with no extra cash.

My dilemma has a moral edge in that me leaving is really leaving them up st creak without a paddle and leaving on the 1st June will be quite painful for them.

So, do I leave normally (handing in notice) or do I take redundancy?
Could I offer them a solution where I leave normally but they in effect compensate me for not taking redundancy (compromise between my two options?)

Thanks

[randlemarcus]

Your last point seems like a gentlemanly compromise.

Or, take redundancy, and offer two weeks of high rate consultancy for the handover

[MagicalTrevor]

randlemarcus said:

Your last point seems like a gentlemanly compromise.

Or, take redundancy, and offer two weeks of high rate consultancy for the handover

This of course assumes that I can take redundancy. I'd prefer not to shaft them (then again, they'd probably do the same to me if roles were reversed) so some sort of agreement seems to be the fairest and most appropriate course of action

[DSM2]

MagicalTrevor said:

I'm in the situation where my job is being moved an extra 1 hour away (on top of my 45 min commute). This is too far so I've looked elsewhere for work and have been offered a new job. The job move is to take place on the 1st June but the new job will actually start part way through June.

My natural instinct is to hand my notice in and leave normally however a colleague has said that I could take redundancy (of my notice period) instead. This would obviously mean leaving on June 1st, but with 4 weeks redundancy money in my pocket, whereas handing my notice in will simply mean leaving part way through June with no extra cash.

My dilemma has a moral edge in that me leaving is really leaving them up st creak without a paddle and leaving on the 1st June will be quite painful for them.

So, do I leave normally (handing in notice) or do I take redundancy?
Could I offer them a solution where I leave normally but they in effect compensate me for not taking redundancy (compromise between my two options?)

Thanks

Nothing you say makes any sense at all.

What does 'redundancy (of my notice period)' mean?

What does your last para mean? In fact the whole post is unintelligible.

Are you being made redundant? If so you are entitled to a notice period + your redundancy pay. Why would you in any circumstances simply resign?

[MagicalTrevor]

Sorry I think I've misunderstood the situation, a friend has now helped explain so I'm happy with my options