Redundancy Help
Author
Discussion

Broccers

Original Poster:

3,237 posts

283 months

Saturday 13th November 2004
quotequote all
Lets say a friend of mine was recently made redundant. Said company had been threatening this for 6 - 8 months and encouraging the individual to find another job, which they didnt do. Becauase the wage bill of this person was perceived to be high an offer of part-time work was put on the table - that was declined.

Eventually the person was served with their notice of redundancy verbally and both parties parted company. It was pointed out at the time by myself that the individual needed something in writing so that as I suspected there was a bullet for the gun that would need firing.

Low and behold, and the reason for having the bullet, the employer has recruited a person to fill this position that was redundant only 4 weeks ago.

Now, whats the course of action ? Who does this person need to speak to as I'm aware that this practice is a big no no.

Thanks in advance.

>>> Edited by Broccers on Saturday 13th November 14:48

dazren

22,612 posts

291 months

Saturday 13th November 2004
quotequote all
CAB or the Law Society should be able to put your friend in contact with a local solicitor specialising in emplyment law.

DAZ

330Clubsport

35,829 posts

301 months

Saturday 13th November 2004
quotequote all

Definitely your friend has a good cause of action here.

"Redundancy" means that the role no longer exists, you can't simply can someone becuase their role is redundant and then recruit someone else for it!!

Did your friend sign anything/accept a pay off?

Broccers

Original Poster:

3,237 posts

283 months

Saturday 13th November 2004
quotequote all
They were given the recommended redundancy which was 1 weeks wage for each year of service and not a penny more.

Luckily the person has found a new job so this is a point of principal rather than anything else. My extremely good employment solicitor would have field day but apart from his huge wage bill what would persuing this futher gain my friend ?

Thats really the question.

330Clubsport

35,829 posts

301 months

Saturday 13th November 2004
quotequote all


Assuming he didn't sign a compromise agreement he could get damages.

icamm

2,153 posts

290 months

Saturday 13th November 2004
quotequote all
Sounds to me like he has a good case to sue them. As has been said a redunancy means that the job is nolonger required by the company. If someone is employed to re-fill that job then it is obviously not redundant.

Broccers

Original Poster:

3,237 posts

283 months

Monday 15th November 2004
quotequote all
Thanks - if say the new person has the same job but a different title what impact would that have ?

Davel

8,982 posts

288 months

Monday 15th November 2004
quotequote all
Could it be constructive dismissal?

I'm no expert but your legal guy will be.

icamm

2,153 posts

290 months

Monday 15th November 2004
quotequote all
Broccers said:
Thanks - if say the new person has the same job but a different title what impact would that have ?
Sounds like they are trying to get around the legal issue by using a different title "so the job must be different".

The devil will be in the detail of his job spec. If the job pretty exactly describes what your friend was doig then he has a case. If it is largely different, even if the actual work seems to be the same in reality, then it is probably going to be difficult to prove.

They need legal advice. It maybe that the threat of legal action/employment tribunal will be enough to get a better settlement.

They will need to move quickly though as there is only a short time to register a claim.

Cousin It

32,039 posts

265 months

Monday 15th November 2004
quotequote all
icamm said:
Sounds to me like he has a good case to sue them. As has been said a redunancy means that the job is nolonger required by the company. If someone is employed to re-fill that job then it is obviously not redundant.


If said person has another job already, then damages, if any, would be reduced. In my experience sometimes it's just better looking forward rather than backwards.

Cousin It

32,039 posts

265 months

Monday 15th November 2004
quotequote all
Cousin It said:

icamm said:
Sounds to me like he has a good case to sue them. As has been said a redunancy means that the job is nolonger required by the company. If someone is employed to re-fill that job then it is obviously not redundant.



If said person has another job already, then damages, if any, would be reduced. In my experience sometimes it's just better looking forward rather than backwards.


..unless there's a very good reason, the time limit to file an application to a tribunal is 3 months. As already mentioned, if you're determined to have a go spend a few quid on some initial legal advice. Weigh up the costs of doing it (legal fees, time off new job etc) against possible rewards.

Cousin It

32,039 posts

265 months

Monday 15th November 2004
quotequote all
..I mean if your mate is determined of course.

I've been in the same situation, if you want to mail me privately I may be able to help.

Broccers

Original Poster:

3,237 posts

283 months

Monday 15th November 2004
quotequote all
Cheers for the advice. Id agree with the looking forward part as would my other half / mate . Decided not to dwell on what would be causing a ruck for a rucks sake. Lifes too short, however, as an employer Id make sure my staff are treated a hell of a lot better.

Cousin It

32,039 posts

265 months

Monday 15th November 2004
quotequote all

2 sMoKiN bArReLs

32,039 posts

265 months

Friday 4th April 2008
quotequote all
Have you noticed that on old threads, the original posts are missing?