BA employees

[moles]

Interested in hearing the views of any legal bods in here on what BA are trying to do by making everyone redundant and re-employing most on worse contracts.

Various government websites say employees can take employer to tribunal for unfair dismissal if they don’t agree, could this open the floodgates on other companies trying this in different industries, sack everyone and re-employ on worse contracts?.

[moles]

edc said:

It is perfectly possible to dismiss and re-engage on new terms. Whether it is a fair process is a different question and whether the employee will object and seek recourse claiming unfair dismissal is another question. These are only ever last ditch attempts as no company really wants to go down this path.

That’s why I started the thread really I know it’s not a “fair” process to do it but the way the world is now I’m not suprised they are trying it on.

I’m not a BA employee but I work for a company that i believe will try something similar given half a chance, I’m just wondering if it’s something more companies will start to do.

As said above if one company does it it’s bad but if all of them start doing it and it becomes the norm it would be interesting!.

[moles]

So do they have to pay you redundancy or not?.

Countdown said:

It's Economics 101

The price of anything is set by the Supply and the Demand. I assume there are still plenty of young men/women wanting to be Cabin Crew and that demand has fallen. That means that price (wages) will fall as well. I guess that BA staff were protected to some degree when the company didn't want to risk industrial action but that isn't the case at the moment.

In answer to the OP - yes they can. I've been involved in a few Job Evaluation exercises where roles were rebanded/regraded. A lot of people weren't happy when faced with £10k paycuts and some thought that they couldn't be forced into accepting the new contracts. This was wrong - they were told that if they didn't sign up they had effectively submitted their resignation.

Edited by Countdown on Sunday 7th June 14:14

[moles]

I think BA are offering redundancy but I’m more interested in whether a company can rip your terms and conditions to shreds without compensating you for the privilege.

Has the employee literally got no say in the matter?.

Countdown said:

moles said:

So do they have to pay you redundancy or not?.

Technically No. It's not redundancy Your job still exists. However a flexible accommodating Employer might pretend that there's been a restructure and you couldn't be redeployed into a new role and offer you redundancy instead..

ETA Apologies - just re-read your post. Are they actually making people redundant or are they terminating contracts? It's not the same thing and I assumed the latter....

Edited by Countdown on Sunday 7th June 18:56

[moles]

Thanks. So an employer can terminate your contract without having to pay redundancy.

Why do more companies not do this then why don’t they all just terminate peoples contracts instead of paying redundancy?.

Countdown said:

moles said:

I think BA are offering redundancy but I’m more interested in whether a company can rip your terms and conditions to shreds without compensating you for the privilege.

Has the employee literally got no say in the matter?.

Hopefully one of the HR Gurus will reply but the answer is basically "yes". There is a process that should be followed and if the Employer doesn't follow it I guess it could be classed as unfair dismissal. the link below might help.

https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/changing-contrac...

[moles]

If a company come to an agreement with the union over t&c changes do you have any right to individually go against this, resign from the company and then go for unfair dismissal?.