Redeployment rather than redundancy.

Running_Horse

It might sound preferable to unemployment, but would involve a major change in hours and reduction in pay.

Anyone been in this situation and can point to simple legal rules?

getmore4less

Does not sound like a suitable alternative.

What process are they following.

Are they going through consultation or just saying this is your new job?

ceridwen

I think the basic idea is that another position is not considered suitable to redeploy someone to if the pay is lower - 'fraid I dont know the actual law to quote on this one - but this is what I understand the legal position to be.

Running_Horse

Looking on Google it is a bit ambiguous, but does mention similar pay, work you are capable of, similar hours (I do shifts and would find alternative childcare difficult and expensive). It is only a plan at the moment for 2010 when work will decrease. Don't want to rock the boat too much as the alternative is no job. Has anyone been through this? Is it a formal/legal process?

juliescot

The ACAS site is very useful, but if your post is being made redundant one way to avoid job losses is to seek suitable alternative employment within the company.

If you currently work shifts and a new post would entail major changes to your working pattern and salary (not take home pay as overtime can never be guaranteed) then I would suggest that is not a suitable alternative.

Pete111

Massive change of hours and a reduction in pay?

You haven't given us much info but on the face of it it would be fairly easy to argue this was a redundancy not a redeployment - is the job itself different also?


P

Running_Horse

I haven't given much info because we don't have much yet. The alternative could be anything from logistics to quality control, to warehouse, to highly technical scientific formulation. None of which have a shift premium.