Redundancy - But alternative job offered - Help!

berrya1

My girlfriend has been offered redundancy for a retail store equivalent to 1 months pay (about £1,200). However, she has also been offered an alternative position within the company.

My question is, if she takes the new position (which as detailed below is a lower wage), will she be entitled to any partial redundancy?

She currently works as an Assistant Store Manager earning 16,250 (per annum). She has been offered a role as a Delegate (Department) Manager at a location much further away from home. The pay is also reduced down to £15,000 (per annum). Thus would she be entitled to any redundancy or any sort?

Within the redundancy letter it states that "if the role is not deemed equivalent by either the employee or employer then redundancy can still be taken". However, this is so vague that this could just mean that you still have the option to take redundancy and leave, not partial redundancy and stay.

Any advice would be much appreciated.

Thanks.

System

I don't think that there is any such thing as 'partial' redundancy. It's either take the job if you think that it is equivalent to the job being made redundant and are happy with the salary or take redundancy. I believe that you still retain a redundancy option even if you take the offered alternate employment and find that it is not suitable.

berrya1

Thought that may be the case but I am aware of people (at other companies), that have had the same situation and they have been offered "partial redundancy". This has been in the form of a gradual pay decrease. Whilst another got a reduced lump sum. Just wanted to know what the legal position was.

bargain_babs

usually a 3 month trial period and then if you don't like the new position/job you can leave and still have redundancy package

Pete111

There is no such thing as partial redundancy. Companies may try to offer a lump sum to sweeten the blow of a lower wage when offering to transfer an employee to a different lower paid role (ie in order to avoid redundancy) but this is an internal (rather than statutory) arrangement

In your GF's case it looks like she can either take the other job or take redundancy. However, she should clarify beforehand that a trial period is formally in place (This should be offered BTW) for the new role and that this can be terminated by either party.

If your GF does not like the new role she should be able to quit and instead take redundancy. However, she only has 4 weeks to decide in law unless the company agrees a longer trial - she should therefore clarify this also.

P

longhauladdict

Hi

also, the suitable alternative position should be legally suitable in terms of status, salary and location (amongst other things). This doesn't sound like it is.
Your Girlf needs to be careful that the company don't state that this is suitable alternative employment as, if they do, they can say that it is not a redundancy situation and enforce the change. If your GF refuses then it could be deemed that she in not entitled to any statutoty redundancy pay as she has forfeited it (only relevant if she has been there under 2 years).

And the trial period only has to last for 4 weeks, at which point she can take redundancy pay still (however ensure that this is written into any letters!)

HTHxx

McKneff

How long has she worked for the company

jdturk

longhauladdict wrote: »

Hi

also, the suitable alternative position should be legally suitable in terms of status, salary and location (amongst other things). This doesn't sound like it is.
Your Girlf needs to be careful that the company don't state that this is suitable alternative employment as, if they do, they can say that it is not a redundancy situation and enforce the change. If your GF refuses then it could be deemed that she in not entitled to any statutoty redundancy pay as she has forfeited it (only relevant if she has been there under 2 years).

And the trial period only has to last for 4 weeks, at which point she can take redundancy pay still (however ensure that this is written into any letters!)

HTHxx

I find this strange, so a company is offering an employee a job ratherthan make someone redundant but it has to meet certain criteria?

surely a job is a job and it leaves the person being made redundant the choice of staying in employment or taking the money and taking a risk at getting more employment?

exil

OK, so the manager of an office in Aberdeen on 30k a year is made redundant. She's offered an alternative job as a 10 hours a week cleaner in Plymouth on the minimum wage. Does that mean that a redundancy situation does not exist and no statutory redundancy is payable?

There has to be some test of whether the job is equivalent. In the case given in the OP then it's not 100% clear whether it is or not. There's quite a large grey area here - in some jobs a job may be considered equivalent even if hundreds of miles away if it's similar salary and conditions, in others, not.