Nothing Is Unbelievable Anymore.
News0 min ago
Redundancy Questions
33 Answers
I'll try to have this make sense, I'm still in a bit of a tizz though....
I started seriously looking for new employment around Autumn time last year. On Monday past, one of the agencies called about a role, sent me the job spec and after a read through, I agreed for my CV to be submitted for it.
At lunchtime today, my Manager took me aside and handed me a letter asking me to meet with him and HR tomorrow as my role is now at risk of redundancy. He told me that tomorrow, HR will go through the procedure with me but basically they have 30 days to redeploy me and if they can't I'm given 30 days notice and sent on my way.
Needless to say I've been ill with the thought of not being able to pay my mortgage,
I want to tell you about the structure of my department:
- Associate Procurement Specialist (the juniors)
- Procurement Specialist (next step up but not supervisor and is also MY role)
- Senior Procurement Specialist (Supervisors)
- Procurement Manager
Now, he told me that it's ONLY the role of the Procurement Specialist that is at risk (there's 3 of us). Everyone is staff except one of the Associate Procurement Specialists, who is contractor.
My first question is, is my employer breaching anything by saving a contractor over a member of staff, regardless of the role? As far as I know, the only difference between the role's is the amount of money we can spend, i.e the Associates have a limit of $50,000 and no corporate credit card and I have a limit of $200,000 and a �50,000 limit card, so I'm really not seeing what the difference is if it's my role or the other role at risk.
Continued....
I started seriously looking for new employment around Autumn time last year. On Monday past, one of the agencies called about a role, sent me the job spec and after a read through, I agreed for my CV to be submitted for it.
At lunchtime today, my Manager took me aside and handed me a letter asking me to meet with him and HR tomorrow as my role is now at risk of redundancy. He told me that tomorrow, HR will go through the procedure with me but basically they have 30 days to redeploy me and if they can't I'm given 30 days notice and sent on my way.
Needless to say I've been ill with the thought of not being able to pay my mortgage,
I want to tell you about the structure of my department:
- Associate Procurement Specialist (the juniors)
- Procurement Specialist (next step up but not supervisor and is also MY role)
- Senior Procurement Specialist (Supervisors)
- Procurement Manager
Now, he told me that it's ONLY the role of the Procurement Specialist that is at risk (there's 3 of us). Everyone is staff except one of the Associate Procurement Specialists, who is contractor.
My first question is, is my employer breaching anything by saving a contractor over a member of staff, regardless of the role? As far as I know, the only difference between the role's is the amount of money we can spend, i.e the Associates have a limit of $50,000 and no corporate credit card and I have a limit of $200,000 and a �50,000 limit card, so I'm really not seeing what the difference is if it's my role or the other role at risk.
Continued....
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Lakitu. 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.
Lakita - do you realise that you are entitled (by law) to up to four weeks trial in the new job if you select redeployment as an alternative to redundancy? The upside of this is that you can try it out, in theory without commitment. If you then decide you don't want it, you are (by law) in the same position as if you had not decided to take the offer of redeployment in the first place.
THERE IS A DOWNSIDE. In theory, if you decide to reject the alternative job, your employer could mess you around and then refuse you redundancy. It could say, we found you an alternative and you rejected it so you have resigned. If THAT happened your only recourse would be to Employment Tribunal. Much depends on the way your employer is dealing with the situation - those that are trying to do the 'right' thing ehtically for their redundant employees would allow the redundancy (and its compensation) to stand. Those that are penny-pinching would not. If you go down the redeployment route, I do suggest you ask about trial periods and try and get it in writing that in the event the trial doesn't work out, you would go back to the staus quo. That way you are covered.
Ring ACAS or post again if you want more.
THERE IS A DOWNSIDE. In theory, if you decide to reject the alternative job, your employer could mess you around and then refuse you redundancy. It could say, we found you an alternative and you rejected it so you have resigned. If THAT happened your only recourse would be to Employment Tribunal. Much depends on the way your employer is dealing with the situation - those that are trying to do the 'right' thing ehtically for their redundant employees would allow the redundancy (and its compensation) to stand. Those that are penny-pinching would not. If you go down the redeployment route, I do suggest you ask about trial periods and try and get it in writing that in the event the trial doesn't work out, you would go back to the staus quo. That way you are covered.
Ring ACAS or post again if you want more.
Lakita
My answer above was constructed before your most recent post covering your meeting with HR.
The straight answer to your question is, no, there is no obligation or requirement to have a voluntary policy.
To a great extent, the consultation process (a legal requirement for the company to do fairly) has got beyond that point - your company is in the middle of the consultation period on compulsory redundancies. At the start of the process would be more normally the time for the company to communicate that it was interested in seeking volunteers.
My answer above was constructed before your most recent post covering your meeting with HR.
The straight answer to your question is, no, there is no obligation or requirement to have a voluntary policy.
To a great extent, the consultation process (a legal requirement for the company to do fairly) has got beyond that point - your company is in the middle of the consultation period on compulsory redundancies. At the start of the process would be more normally the time for the company to communicate that it was interested in seeking volunteers.
Yes it was - sorry - I've read your question again. (There's lots of threads involved in redundancies right now and I got confused).
Yes I believe that you absolutely right to ask about voluntary redundancy. It will have probably confounded them - because they don't want to go down that route (my guess).
KEEP YOUR OWN NOTES OF ALL OF THESE CONVERSATIONS - include as much as you can of what you asked and what there answers were. Date and sign these and hold them. They (if they have any sense) will be doing the same anyway. Your notes may be important to you if things turn out difficult for you.
Wait and see what the response to your question is.
What is your 'ideal' outcome? - 1) Get the other job and still walk off with some money? 2) Be deployed in the other job? (but above all, avoid being left with no job?)
If so, the potential trump card you have (it is not yet an Ace) is the alternative job opportunity that you have found. Obviously tell no-one about this. Playing for additional time gives you the time to progress the alternative job application.
Yes I believe that you absolutely right to ask about voluntary redundancy. It will have probably confounded them - because they don't want to go down that route (my guess).
KEEP YOUR OWN NOTES OF ALL OF THESE CONVERSATIONS - include as much as you can of what you asked and what there answers were. Date and sign these and hold them. They (if they have any sense) will be doing the same anyway. Your notes may be important to you if things turn out difficult for you.
Wait and see what the response to your question is.
What is your 'ideal' outcome? - 1) Get the other job and still walk off with some money? 2) Be deployed in the other job? (but above all, avoid being left with no job?)
If so, the potential trump card you have (it is not yet an Ace) is the alternative job opportunity that you have found. Obviously tell no-one about this. Playing for additional time gives you the time to progress the alternative job application.
My ideal is definately to get this job I have an interview for on Monday*, keep quiet about it and walk away with a fat redundancy package in my pocket straight into another job. I don't actually want to continue working for them, I thought they were a shower of shy-tes (lol) anyway, hence me looking for another job from Autumn last year, but if I have no alternative than takle a redeployed job then so be it because I still have a mortgage to pay, which has more priority than my happiness at the moment.
*I spoke to the agency this morning, and he confirmed that the job has never been interviewd and I'm just very lucky that my CV landed on the right desk at the right time and I'm the only person they're talking to.........that sounds hopeful to say the least.
*I spoke to the agency this morning, and he confirmed that the job has never been interviewd and I'm just very lucky that my CV landed on the right desk at the right time and I'm the only person they're talking to.........that sounds hopeful to say the least.
OK, good luck with that then.
Just because the employer says 'the consultancy process is 30 days' doesn't mean it has to be. The process has to be reasonable and fair - that is the test an Employment Tribunal would use. Employers often pretend that they control the process to their staff whilst the consultation is going on - they do to an extent - but your question was a very reasonable one. I feel sure this is why you received such a pained look. Play for time whilst you progress the other job. Keep us in the picture.
Just because the employer says 'the consultancy process is 30 days' doesn't mean it has to be. The process has to be reasonable and fair - that is the test an Employment Tribunal would use. Employers often pretend that they control the process to their staff whilst the consultation is going on - they do to an extent - but your question was a very reasonable one. I feel sure this is why you received such a pained look. Play for time whilst you progress the other job. Keep us in the picture.
Hi again. I've been at work all day & this is the first chance I've had to catch up.
I'm glad buildersmate confirmed what I said yesterday about having a trial period in the redeployment job. Like I said yesterday, Mr O has been given this option but has been told if he has a trial with the redeployment job, hates it or can't hack it and then takes redundancy, his redundancy package will be about �2K less than if he took redundancy straightaway.
I hope you receive good news on Monday regarding your job application. Keep us posted. xx
I'm glad buildersmate confirmed what I said yesterday about having a trial period in the redeployment job. Like I said yesterday, Mr O has been given this option but has been told if he has a trial with the redeployment job, hates it or can't hack it and then takes redundancy, his redundancy package will be about �2K less than if he took redundancy straightaway.
I hope you receive good news on Monday regarding your job application. Keep us posted. xx
I will Mrs O
HR got back to me RE the voluntary redundancy, she confirmed that they have no policy, however, after a discussion with her Manager, I am welcome to put my request in writing and she will go to the board of directors and they will make a decision. I've told her I would think about it over the weekend and get back to her early next week - obviously I'm just buying time to see if I get this job or not LOL.
x
HR got back to me RE the voluntary redundancy, she confirmed that they have no policy, however, after a discussion with her Manager, I am welcome to put my request in writing and she will go to the board of directors and they will make a decision. I've told her I would think about it over the weekend and get back to her early next week - obviously I'm just buying time to see if I get this job or not LOL.
x
Mrs. O
Your hubby's experience is not untypical of a less-caring company's approach, regarding the 'it will be worth less money to you if you reject the offer on the table after a job trial'. Some companies will maintain the same offer. See here about the 'rules' on trials.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Redunda ncyAndLeavingYourJob/DG_10029844 (scroll down a bit)
My suggestion is that it is not worth fighting the argument about less money later now. If your hubby would prefer the job (to redundancy), it is better to go into the thing with the company believing his commitment to it, and then in the event that it doesn't work out, THEN try fighting the argument about it is worth less money at THAT time.
If you look at the link you will see that the legislation says that the employee shall not be in a worse situation from rejecting a trial than if he accepted it in the first instance. But that is against the statutory redundancy amounts. If the employer is offering enhanced terms for redundancy now then I suspect it may be within the law to modify those enhanced terms in the event of a rejected trail period (I am not sure - this is a fine point of legal detail and I am not a lawyer). The other way to think about it is that your hubby will have had a longer period of employment in total if he goes into a trial that he later rejects.
Keep records of discussions he has on this - he may need them later if the worst happens (e.g. he goes into the trial, rejects it, is paid smaller sums and decides he wants to fight that decision through the legal process).
Your hubby's experience is not untypical of a less-caring company's approach, regarding the 'it will be worth less money to you if you reject the offer on the table after a job trial'. Some companies will maintain the same offer. See here about the 'rules' on trials.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Redunda ncyAndLeavingYourJob/DG_10029844 (scroll down a bit)
My suggestion is that it is not worth fighting the argument about less money later now. If your hubby would prefer the job (to redundancy), it is better to go into the thing with the company believing his commitment to it, and then in the event that it doesn't work out, THEN try fighting the argument about it is worth less money at THAT time.
If you look at the link you will see that the legislation says that the employee shall not be in a worse situation from rejecting a trial than if he accepted it in the first instance. But that is against the statutory redundancy amounts. If the employer is offering enhanced terms for redundancy now then I suspect it may be within the law to modify those enhanced terms in the event of a rejected trail period (I am not sure - this is a fine point of legal detail and I am not a lawyer). The other way to think about it is that your hubby will have had a longer period of employment in total if he goes into a trial that he later rejects.
Keep records of discussions he has on this - he may need them later if the worst happens (e.g. he goes into the trial, rejects it, is paid smaller sums and decides he wants to fight that decision through the legal process).
