Redundancy advice ..... pls
Discussion
Hi,
Been given 30 days consultation that all our 'jobs' at our office are redundant.
However I know that the same work I an others do will be assigned to people in another office. Is that within the 'law' on constructive dismissal? anyone know?
In some cases the roles are very specific - to provide customer support in and out of hours. This is not currently done elsewhere but people in another office are about to start doing it.
thank you very much.
Been given 30 days consultation that all our 'jobs' at our office are redundant.
However I know that the same work I an others do will be assigned to people in another office. Is that within the 'law' on constructive dismissal? anyone know?
In some cases the roles are very specific - to provide customer support in and out of hours. This is not currently done elsewhere but people in another office are about to start doing it.
thank you very much.
Two issues I would think: location & also whether you (and others in your office who are being put at risk) can carry out the functions currently being carried out by the people in the other office who are going to be assigned the work you do.
If the other office is close (and possibly even if its not) and you can do the work, then you could potentially argue that everybody should be put at risk in a single (larger) pool. Difficult to say without more info. Is the office you are in being closed?
If the other office is close (and possibly even if its not) and you can do the work, then you could potentially argue that everybody should be put at risk in a single (larger) pool. Difficult to say without more info. Is the office you are in being closed?
It is unclear from the opening post whether the OP has been given notice of possible redundancy, or if the employer has gone beyond that and has given notice of termination of his employment. It appears more likely that what has happened is that the employer has commenced a period of consultation about possible redundancies.
Constructive dismissal does not arise here. Constructive dismissal occurs when an employer repudiates the contract of employment and the employee responds to that repudiation by resigning from the employment.
Contrary to a suggestion made above, if an employer makes an employee redundant, then the employer does indeed dismiss the employee, the reason for the dismissal being redundancy.
If an employee has been with an employer for at least two years, then the employer is obliged to carry out various procedures before dismissing the employee for redundancy.
Where the work at location X is ceasing or diminishing, the employees at location X may be redundant, even if there remains work to be done at location Y.
It is not possible to advise further without details of the facts of the case.
By the way, why are the words "job" and "law" in inverted commas in the opening post? Is this some sort of hipster irony thing? Jobs and law are both real things, and don't usually need inverted comas. EDIT: Or, indeed, inverted commas.
Constructive dismissal does not arise here. Constructive dismissal occurs when an employer repudiates the contract of employment and the employee responds to that repudiation by resigning from the employment.
Contrary to a suggestion made above, if an employer makes an employee redundant, then the employer does indeed dismiss the employee, the reason for the dismissal being redundancy.
If an employee has been with an employer for at least two years, then the employer is obliged to carry out various procedures before dismissing the employee for redundancy.
Where the work at location X is ceasing or diminishing, the employees at location X may be redundant, even if there remains work to be done at location Y.
It is not possible to advise further without details of the facts of the case.
By the way, why are the words "job" and "law" in inverted commas in the opening post? Is this some sort of hipster irony thing? Jobs and law are both real things, and don't usually need inverted comas. EDIT: Or, indeed, inverted commas.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 12th April 19:26
Hi,
Just to clarify the points asked:
- Yes we have been served with notice of being at risk of redundancy.
- We are in a 30 day consultation period while we look at other positions in other offices.
- This office is being closed.
- The work we do is going to be carried out by people in Glasgow, we are in Cheshire.
- Some have been offered a role in Glasgow but that would mean relocation.
Basically we are software developers/testers/support. The company has contracts to provide support and fixes etc etc which would be done by this office but now will have to be done by people in Glasgow and we are being asked to transfer knowledge because they haven't worked on our software before.
Reason for asking is:
https://www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/articles/...
Mentions specifically in 'Staff In Staff Out' section about someone doing your job in another location.
thanks
Mike
Just to clarify the points asked:
- Yes we have been served with notice of being at risk of redundancy.
- We are in a 30 day consultation period while we look at other positions in other offices.
- This office is being closed.
- The work we do is going to be carried out by people in Glasgow, we are in Cheshire.
- Some have been offered a role in Glasgow but that would mean relocation.
Basically we are software developers/testers/support. The company has contracts to provide support and fixes etc etc which would be done by this office but now will have to be done by people in Glasgow and we are being asked to transfer knowledge because they haven't worked on our software before.
Reason for asking is:
https://www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/articles/...
Mentions specifically in 'Staff In Staff Out' section about someone doing your job in another location.
thanks
Mike
Edited by DoubleByte on Wednesday 12th April 10:58
DoubleByte said:
Hi,
Just to clarify the points asked:
- Yes we have been served with notice of being at risk of redundancy.
- We are in a 30 day consultation period while we look at other positions in other offices.
- This office is being closed.
- The work we do is going to be carried out by people in Glasgow, we are in Cheshire.
- Some have been offered a role in Glasgow but that would mean relocation.
Basically we are software developers/testers/support. The company has contracts to provide support and fixes etc etc which would be done by this office but now will have to be done by people in Glasgow and we are being asked to transfer knowledge because they haven't worked on our software before.
Reason for asking is:
https://www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/articles/...
Mentions specifically in 'Staff In Staff Out' section about someone doing your job in another location.
thanks
Mike
Based on what you write now then this seems a fair and transparent and wholly normal redundancy scenario. Whilst it's not nice to be part of it you should explore any opportunities within the organisation, and it sounds like the organisation is assisting with that, and consider whether relocation is an option for you. Thereafter, get your CV prepared and start job hunting now. The whole point of the consultation period is for the organisation to share relevant information and for you to ask questions.Just to clarify the points asked:
- Yes we have been served with notice of being at risk of redundancy.
- We are in a 30 day consultation period while we look at other positions in other offices.
- This office is being closed.
- The work we do is going to be carried out by people in Glasgow, we are in Cheshire.
- Some have been offered a role in Glasgow but that would mean relocation.
Basically we are software developers/testers/support. The company has contracts to provide support and fixes etc etc which would be done by this office but now will have to be done by people in Glasgow and we are being asked to transfer knowledge because they haven't worked on our software before.
Reason for asking is:
https://www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/articles/...
Mentions specifically in 'Staff In Staff Out' section about someone doing your job in another location.
thanks
Mike
Edited by DoubleByte on Wednesday 12th April 10:58
I agree.
OP, edc is the Head of HR at a telecoms company. I am a lawyer that does some employment law. Neither of us is infallible, but each of us is likely to be a better source of advice on issues such as redundancy than money dot blah dot com, which is a sort of fancified bloke in pub says his sister's boyfriend's uncle's friend's cleaning lady's son won 90 million quid at an employment tribunal because his employer spelled his name wrong in a letter kind of place.
OP, edc is the Head of HR at a telecoms company. I am a lawyer that does some employment law. Neither of us is infallible, but each of us is likely to be a better source of advice on issues such as redundancy than money dot blah dot com, which is a sort of fancified bloke in pub says his sister's boyfriend's uncle's friend's cleaning lady's son won 90 million quid at an employment tribunal because his employer spelled his name wrong in a letter kind of place.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 12th April 16:57
Breadvan72 said:
I agree.
OP, edc is the Head of HR at a telecoms company. I am a lawyer that does some employment law. Neither of us is infallible, but each of us is likely to be a better source of advice on issues such as redundancy than money dot blah dot com, which is a sort of fancified bloke in pub says his sister's boyfriend's uncle's friend's cleaning lady's son won 90 million quid at an employment tribunal because his employer spelled his name wrong in a letter kind of place.
lolOP, edc is the Head of HR at a telecoms company. I am a lawyer that does some employment law. Neither of us is infallible, but each of us is likely to be a better source of advice on issues such as redundancy than money dot blah dot com, which is a sort of fancified bloke in pub says his sister's boyfriend's uncle's friend's cleaning lady's son won 90 million quid at an employment tribunal because his employer spelled his name wrong in a letter kind of place.
Edited by Breadvan72 on Wednesday 12th April 16:57
I thought it might be a longshot to be honest. But it's just galling that some people in the other office were doing other work before this but now some of the redundant team are having to tell them how to do the same work they are leaving behind. We are a tech company and location really is irrelevant to what we do, it appears to be all down to cost. The work still needs doing but the Glasgow office is cheaper.
thanks again.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff