Should I be claiming for unfair dismissal ?

Im not convinced. If your role is no longer in existence then your role is redundant, no similar role exists.


Similar work is being done for the business by an outside provider.


Now I am still learning on this topic, so someone may correct me (or many people) but this does seem like a reasonable situation.

There's an awful lot of certainty here based on almost no facts.

If you can find a solicitor, do get advice, but be cautious of any such certainty from a lawyer who will want a bill paying. You pay that, plus tribunal fees, whatever happens! If you can get no win no fee advic, art least see what they say, and if they are interested, READ EVERY WORD of anything they want you to sign, because there's a lot of small print!

But I would like to know exactly what is being outsourced, because an EXPANDED role is not your role, it is a different role, and a job that you don't do. Outsourcing may indeed activate TUPE. It also may not, and there are many examples of situations where it doesn't. One of those would be where the service being purchased is significantly different from the existing in house provision, to the extent that the existing job is, indeed, redundant, and the post is made redundant before the transfer or immediately afterwards.

How large is this employer? Is there any union involvement? Are you in a union?

MoneyPit1977 wrote: »

I said it sounds like a TUPE claim not that it was for certain. However I stand by those comments


As an HR Director I've dealt with a lot of these. The general principle from a company standpoint is that its quite risky to blithely assert TUPE does not exist (or ignore it) if there is half an argument it does apply - the penalties for not consulting on/allowing for TUPE can be quite harsh.


The OP said that work to be outsourced could not (apparently) be done by one person. That is not necessarily a single expanded role. It sounds equally plausible that the current work will be fulfilled by an individual and other (perhaps new) elements picked up by further person or individuals. Either way, the burden of proof ultimately lies with the company not the OP.


As I say, any reputable lawyer will grant a short free consultation. Do not be afraid to discuss your case here as you may well have a decent shout. Please note also that, most firms faced with a decent claim properly outlined by a competent lawyer will seek to settle well before tribunal.

And as a trade union official I have also dealt with a lot of them. Redundancy, behind or after an outsourcing of a service is quite common. That is not to say that it is the case here, but employers are not as scared of TUPE as you imply. Any decent employer can deal with one competently.

And yes, a competent lawyer could perhaps force a settlement whatever the case is. But my observation was to watch your bill. Because there will be one. There is no legal aid. And I too often see lawyers happy to rack up a bill that amounts to more than what people get. Hence the question about a unio. They will represent a decent case for free. And pay the £1250 that a tribunal now visits to claim. If one needs to consult a lawyer, no win no fee have benefits in that they are ruthlessly honest. They can't afford to take an unattainable claim. So they'll tell you the absolute truth.

And the OP needs to balance the cost and the risk. As soon as the employer gets wind of the claim, they can probably kiss a reference goodbye. So they need to be very sure of winning.