Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    hammertim
    Redundancy question
    • #1
    • 9th Dec 12, 7:44 PM
    Redundancy question 9th Dec 12 at 7:44 PM
    Posting this on behalf of my nephew who was made redundant Last Friday.

    Will try to explain what has happened as best as I can.
    My nephew was told last Friday that the company that he has worked for the last 18 years has become insolvent and that he was being made redundant from that day.
    He has been told that he claim for redundancy from the National insurance fund as well as 12 weeks lieu of notice.

    Now this is where it gets interesting, the company he worked for was bought out about a year ago and became part of a group, although he was still officially employed by his old company still.

    Now this company has become insolvent he has been offered a new position within the group as a new employee and new t's&c's.
    He has been told that he can still receive his redundancy payment but obviously he wouldn't get the 12 weeks lieu of notice payment.

    What he wants to do is move to the same area that I live in which is 100 miles away, but obviously he wants to have as much money behind him as possible in case he can't find a job immediately.

    My question is can he refuse the new position as technically is is a different company, which will enable him to get his redundancy and 12 weeks lieu of notice payment.

    Hope this all makes sense
    Thanks.
Page 1
  • SarEl
    • #2
    • 9th Dec 12, 8:49 PM
    • #2
    • 9th Dec 12, 8:49 PM
    The words make perfect sense. I am afraid the content doesn't altogether!

    I assume that the transfer of employers was not a TUPE. That isn't clear from what you say, and I can't be clear on that unless I know what "bought out" means - asset transfer or a share takeover. I am assuming the latter because otherwise it makes even less sense - but I may be wrong.

    So he is redundant. And he gets redundancy pay. That is clear. Assuming all of the above assumptions are correct! I then assume that he's been offered a new job - so yes, it is correct that the RPS would not pay notice pay if he gets a new job (or they would deduct JSA whether he claimed it or not). If the RPS know he has been offered another job and has refused it - no, they will not pay the notice pay. This is a government fund, paid for by taxpayers - they won't pay anything unless they absolutely have to. Does that make sense, and have I got any assumptions wrong?
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim's to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

926Posts Today

5,962Users online

Martin's Twitter