Quizzes & Puzzles7 mins ago
redundancy query
2 Answers
i'm curious to know how different companies can justify their vastly different levels of redundancy payment limits. Is there a legal or government reason for capping a person's redundancy at different levels in different companies? my mother (who had 14 years service under her belt) was part of a company that merged with a second company, but her payment limit was about �15k less than this other company, and despite the fact that she had worked for the first company for so long they said they were not actually obliged to give her as much as she was entitled to because of their stupid payment limit, whereas she would have got pretty much all of it if the second company's limits had been applied! What's the point of giving so many years to a company when they won't even give you what you're actually entitled to when they kick you out of a job? Can anyone enlighten me with their experiences with this sort of thing?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by fionah. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.You are entitled to statutory redundancy pay if you have worked for an employer for two continuous years since the age of 18. The statutory minimum is, put very simply, half a week's pay for each complete year of service between the ages of 18 and 21; 1 week's pay for each complete year of service between the ages of 22 and 40 and 1.5 week's pay for each complete year of service between the ages of 41 and 65. The maximum number of years continuous service that can be counted for statutory redundancy payments purposes is 20. Of course, an employer can choose to pay much higher redundancy payments. If your mother has received the minimum she is entitled to by law, then, although it appears unfair, there is little she can do unless under the terms of her contract of employment she is entitled to more, in which case she may have a claim for breach of contract against her employer.