The 'last in first out' system

janey_uk

The MSE weekly email refers to "the 'last in first out' system" when it is talking about job losses. Please can anyone clarify why that particularly was included in the email? Was this in reference to how employers might decide redundancies?

My understanding (as a former shop steward) is that the 'last in first out' approach to redundancies has been legally unacceptable for years as...
a) it isn't a genuine business-need based approach to redundancies which should be properly consulted on as per legislation and
b) it frequently has a disproportionate impact on part time and shorter term workers meaning it affects women and younger people most which would be indirect discrimination.

Am I missing something? I just didn't get why it was included on the email as a 'system' when it is no longer legal? We wouldn't want people to accept unfair dismissal on those grounds because they think it is a 'system'?

Ref http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2008/08/07/46986/redundancy-last-in-first-out-policies.html

neilp

Obviously, I can't speak for the authors of the MSE weekly e-mail, but in my experience the 'last in first out' system often applies in practice, if not in principle, regardless of the legalities. Indeed, I didn't realise there was a legal issue with it, and would appreciate more detail.

I'm not saying I agree with the system - I definitely do not. However, in the current climate, it is a good idea to be aware of the risks and prepare appropriately.

AlwaysPondering

I have no idea as to the legals of the last in - first out, however we have got rid of quite a few people here over the last few months.. and most of those gone were the last in... I think the logic being used is that those we have got rid of don't have the skills (because we were in the process of training them up) to be of huge use to the business at this moment in time..

janey_uk

You're right, in some cases it can be acceptable, but best practice is that employers shouldn't just resort straight to it without checking the impact. It is still a common way of deciding, but since the intro of the age regs in 2006 it has been challenged both successfully and unsuccessfully, depending on whether it actually has an impact. A lot of big employers (including government departments and the NHS) ruled it out as a system for redundancy when auditing their policies for potentially discriminatory practice.

Some additional links:
http://diversity.monster.co.uk/10378_en-GB_p1.asp
http://www.emplaw.co.uk/researchfree-redirector.aspx?StartPage=data%2f98apr026.htm

janey_uk

Just want to clarify, I'm not a lawyer... I'm not intending to get into debate about the rights and wrongs of particular company's policies as it is always very complex. I just wanted to query its inclusion in the weekly email as I'm not sure it is necessarily helpful. If MSE wants to branch out into giving ACAS type employment guides then I'm all for it, but it's a sticky and complicated area to get into.

splutterbug

Well it was pretty much the last thing I wanted to read seeing as I quit my job last week as I've been offered a new one elsewhere, may seem like bad timing but other things need to be taken into account, for instnace how much is the pay rise is the risk worth taking, also how many people are doing your job at the new company, for me I'm heading a very small team so it's unlikely my job would dissapear especially with long term contracts in place.

One thing I would say is if you are in an industry that has a union, now would be a very good time to join

Katie-Kat-Kins

The last in first out system is discriminatory and cannot be used. However for large scale redundancy a points system is often used that is weighted in favour of those with length of service and also takes account of things like amount of sickness, disciplinary record etc etc.

The main reason for not moving job at a time of economic uncertainty is that without two years continuous service you do not qualify for a redundancy payment. Further without one years service you cannot claim unfair dismissal.

So the wording of the email was poor but the intention was correct, moving jobs in the current climate is not ideal!

MothballsWallet

I had this once: I was the newest person in the company at the time, so I was one of the first to go because my short length of service was a mark against me.

(They eventually rescinded the redundancy notice, even though I was accepting a new job offer.)

This was in Scotland in [STRIKE]1998[/STRIKE] 2000, btw.