Staff Treatment at The Works

AngryMother

My son worked at the Head Office of The Works Bookshops for 10 years and then in November 2007 he was made redundant. They claimed that the department he worked in was over-staffed.

Even though they had just taken on a new member of staff three months before in the same department.

It seems to me that they did not want him to have the benefits that went with working at The Works for 10 years. They just want to keep these benefits for the management member of staff.

From my point of view it seems that they are abusing the Redundancy laws, to get around from not been taken to court for unfair dismissal. This is because they could not sack him, due to him having a good work record.

So if you agree with The Works abusing the Redundancy laws, then just carry on shoping at The Works Bookshops but it you don't agree then like me just stop using them.

SpammyTheSpammer

Every one that I have seen has a CLOSING DOWN sale on, and on and on....

Our local one (in Aylesbury) had it's final closing down sale and has actually closed!

Actually, I rather liked it as it sold slightly out-of-date computer manuals for a fraction of their original price a few years ago but has been going downhill steadily since then. My daughter bought art supplies from there as they were reasonable, especially the canvasses but that was about it

Pound

Do you know that was the reason he was made redundant or is it speculation? Did the person who was employed three months earlier perform a different role to your son? Making decisions about redundancies isn't just based on length of service and sometimes it's never based on this; things like qualifications, absence, etc. can be a factor. Was your son given a reason why he was selected over other people?

AngryMother

Pound wrote: »

Do you know that was the reason he was made redundant or is it speculation? Did the person who was employed three months earlier perform a different role to your son? Making decisions about redundancies isn't just based on length of service and sometimes it's never based on this; things like qualifications, absence, etc. can be a factor. Was your son given a reason why he was selected over other people?

No, he was just told here is your 10th Anniversary gift; which was for working for 10 years at The Works. Then he was given an enevelope which was his notice of redundancy! He was told to leave the building straight away or he would be arrested!

phlogeston

AngryMother wrote: »

in November 2007 he was made redundant

Why are you posting this on a noticeboard over a year later?

It is too late to do anything about it now - just move on.

Tozer

Something odd about this post.

a) Made redundant in November 2007? Why wait until now to complain about it?

b) IF the redundancy was unfair, then rights exist (although now time barred) to obtain redress.

c) Are you sure it was redundancy? Nothing is mentioned about any statutory redundancy payment.

Pound

I'm guessing the person in question is still unemployed and the OP still feels bitter about it.

There are laws that should in theory protect against these things. Did you or your son look into any options should as following the company appeal procedure, contacting ACAS or a tribunal?

AngryMother

phlogeston wrote: »

Why are you posting this on a noticeboard over a year later?

It is too late to do anything about it now - just move on.

I have only just found out about this website and I don't like companys who abuse the law but are still within the law

AngryMother

Tozer wrote: »

Something odd about this post.

c) Are you sure it was redundancy? Nothing is mentioned about any statutory redundancy payment.

Please read my replay to Pound, which will answer this question.

AngryMother

Pound wrote: »

I'm guessing the person in question is still unemployed and the OP still feels bitter about it.

There are laws that should in theory protect against these things. Did you or your son look into any options should as following the company appeal procedure, ACAS or a tribunal?

My son went to a solicitor to see about this and he was told that they where just about acting within the law. It's just the manner of how it was done. Here is a gift in one hand and then get out with another at the same time.

Tozer

AngryMother wrote: »

Please read my replay to Pound, which will answer this question.

No it doesn't. Did he receive a redundancy payment?