Making somebody redundant - where do I stand legally?

Lifeisbutadream

Zazen999 wrote: »

Do you have work for him to do?

He just helps with what the rest of them do. He certainly doesnt get his own workload!

Zazen999

Lifeisbutadream wrote: »

He just helps with what the rest of them do. He certainly doesnt get his own workload!

So, there is work for him to do then - if you kept him on?

So, if he appeals the redundancy, which he is entitled to do - you can't prove that the work for him has dried up?

robpw2

Lifeisbutadream wrote: »

Yes he is wholly our employee.

His written warning was for fiddling his timesheet (i.e. stealing from us) he has not done it again but it has unsettled me and OH and we have decided that we don't want to carry dead wood any more.

We only have a small business and cant afford to keep throwing money away.

I don't mean to be funny but reading your posts it sounds like you have taken a dislike to this lad and are trying to get rid of him anyway you can and dont appear to have given him much oppurtunity to learn and rectify his mistakes
redundancy is not the answer because your not getting rid for what hes done (or not) but because apparently you cannot afford him

You have to do things the proper way and you have to use your disciplinary procedure

DCodd

Genuine question here.

If the op takes the disciplinary route, would she not be leaving herself open to an unfair dismissal claim? Whereas making him redundant will only leave her open to an unfair selection claim which is extremely hard to prove as he is the only employee?

You are allowed to make people redundant if your business can no longer afford to employ them, as far as I know??

robpw2

DCodd wrote: »

Genuine question here.

If the op takes the disciplinary route, would she not be leaving herself open to an unfair dismissal claim? Whereas making him redundant will only leave her open to an unfair selection claim which is extremely hard to prove as he is the only employee?

You are allowed to make people redundant if your business can no longer afford to employ them, as far as I know??

yes but op is supposedly getting rid because of his behaviour etc and because he stole and they now lack trust

and the company can afford to keep him if the lad gets made redundant he walks away thinking he was sacked because they could afford him rather than learning from his mistakes

Debt_Free_Chick

The way I see it, redundancy is "business led" not "people/person led". Redundancy would normally be the result of a review by the company of staffing needs, based on future business direction, level of orders/work to be done and the type of skills needed to do that work.

Clearly, this is not redundancy.

Training staff and taking on apprentices is not an easy path! It's rather like having to foster a teenager! The training you give will almost certainly not be restricted to the technical skills that the A needs to learn, but will also cover matters like conduct, behaviour, inter-personal skills/relationships. You are always going to have to deal with the issues, to greater or lesser degrees depending on the person you hire.

Presumably, you have a formal programme for A's development? And a review process where you sit down with the A and talk about how he's doing against that programme, also allowing him to raise any questions/issues about the things he finds difficult/challenging?

It does rather sound as though he might not be getting all the guidance he needs and you may well feel you have "bitten off too much".

In his defence, it sounds as though he has responded well to the first warning -- is that so? If yes, then perhaps he just needs clearer guidance as to what is expected of him? Perhaps you are being over-sensitive to his behaviour and seeing issues that don't exist or exaggerating minor points that could be addressed by communication?

As I see it, you have two choices .... take him down the disciplinary route, if there is indeed sufficient grounds to do this (and think carefully about what he has actually done as well as what he's failed to do, and why!).

Or, if he is not a good fit for the business, let him go nicely, with legal advice and a compromise agreement i.e. pay him off at a level that persuades him that a Tribunal would not get him a better result.

Otherwise, you need to commit to a development plan that has him work his way to being a valued and valuable employee.

HTH

Zazen999

DCodd wrote: »

Genuine question here.

If the op takes the disciplinary route, would she not be leaving herself open to an unfair dismissal claim? Whereas making him redundant will only leave her open to an unfair selection claim which is extremely hard to prove as he is the only employee?

You are allowed to make people redundant if your business can no longer afford to employ them, as far as I know??

Totally agree, particularly as she missed out on sacking him only a week or so ago.

Which is why I suggested a compromise agreement.......

Lifeisbutadream

robpw2 wrote: »

I don't mean to be funny but reading your posts it sounds like you have taken a dislike to this lad and are trying to get rid of him anyway you can and dont appear to have given him much oppurtunity to learn and rectify his mistakes
redundancy is not the answer because your not getting rid for what hes done (or not) but because apparently you cannot afford him

You have to do things the proper way and you have to use your disciplinary procedure

Thanks for your useful input Rob :rolleyes:

If I couldn't afford him, then that would be a pretty good reason to make him redundant don't you think.

Stick to answering me in DT - this board is supposed to be for people with knowledge of businesses and how they work - as you don't even have a job, I don't really think that you can help much - do you?

robpw2

Lifeisbutadream wrote: »

Thanks for your useful input Rob :rolleyes:

If I couldn't afford him, then that would be a pretty good reason to make him redundant don't you think.

Stick to answering me in DT - this board is supposed to be for people with knowledge of businesses and how they work - as you don't even have a job, I don't really think that you can help much - do you?

no but someone who is studying contract law i do understand bits

i dont have a job due to my health fair enough but to be honest any BOSS or Employer who is seeking information about how to get rid of an employee on a website to do with money saving needs to seriously question there abiltiy to manage !!

Lifeisbutadream

Debt_Free_Chick wrote: »

The way I see it, redundancy is "business led" not "people/person led". Redundancy would normally be the result of a review by the company of staffing needs, based on future business direction, level of orders/work to be done and the type of skills needed to do that work.

Clearly, this is not redundancy.

Training staff and taking on apprentices is not an easy path! It's rather like having to foster a teenager! The training you give will almost certainly not be restricted to the technical skills that the A needs to learn, but will also cover matters like conduct, behaviour, inter-personal skills/relationships. You are always going to have to deal with the issues, to greater or lesser degrees depending on the person you hire.

Presumably, you have a formal programme for A's development? And a review process where you sit down with the A and talk about how he's doing against that programme, also allowing him to raise any questions/issues about the things he finds difficult/challenging?

It does rather sound as though he might not be getting all the guidance he needs and you may well feel you have "bitten off too much".

In his defence, it sounds as though he has responded well to the first warning -- is that so? If yes, then perhaps he just needs clearer guidance as to what is expected of him? Perhaps you are being over-sensitive to his behaviour and seeing issues that don't exist or exaggerating minor points that could be addressed by communication?

As I see it, you have two choices .... take him down the disciplinary route, if there is indeed sufficient grounds to do this (and think carefully about what he has actually done as well as what he's failed to do, and why!).

Or, if he is not a good fit for the business, let him go nicely, with legal advice and a compromise agreement i.e. pay him off at a level that persuades him that a Tribunal would not get him a better result.

Otherwise, you need to commit to a development plan that has him work his way to being a valued and valuable employee.

HTH

The problems that we have had with him have gone on for a long time. There is absolutely nothing wrong wit the way he has been guided and the reason that he is still here is because we actually like him - he has shown keenness and wants to be a joiner.

We have had development plans in place throughout and he seems incapable of doing them - all he wants is his apprenticeship - he rushed through his coursework to get it done quickly and no matter how many times we explain things to him he makes the same mistakes over and over.

This is not something we just woke up with this morning it has been going on for months.

I do not see why I should have to 'pay him off' and TBH, although I want to go down the correct route, I simply would not do that - why should I pay him to leave?

Is it easier to say that we can't afford him? its not like we have millions in teh bank !