made redundant and need help 2

Anihilator

grayclose31 wrote: »

again this was due to me being the last in so first out.

However as i have stated 3 other people have joined the company since i started.

One is our van driver the other is a warehouse employee and a sales person has started to work in Spain for the company. This is due to the owner spending most of his time in Spain at his resedence there. He has set up a division of our company out there as he is mainly there and needed some help as he has seen a gap in the market for our products.

As i said i was not the last to be employed.

Yes but you were the last of the group concerned.
If that is your defence then you will lose.

So basically of the people were the cut was decided necessary you were the last in.

Um hate to break it to you but your appeal will lose and any tribunial would be laughed at.

This redundancy seems entirely fair and the criteria employed is legal.

DVardysShadow

grayclose31 wrote: »

[In reply to:You dont know why you werent made redundant hence you dont know what you are even appealing.]

i was advised that the reason was due to the ongoing economic climate.

Draw the distinction between the reason for the redundancies and the reason for you being selected.

grayclose31

I am not sure what you mean. Could you please explain a little more

Anihilator

grayclose31 wrote: »

I am not sure what you mean. Could you please explain a little more

What I mean is if the company has identified legitimately due to the downturn there is less business/sales and need to get rid of a salesperson then it is the last salesman in.

Getting rid of a delivery driver wont solve anything

Likewise if there is a market in Spain and this person is being utilised whereas UK staff arent then of course the job loss will be in the UK

the end of it is you have no case

DVardysShadow

grayclose31 wrote: »

I am not sure what you mean. Could you please explain a little more

The ongoing economic climate is a reason for the redundancies. It is not a reason for selecting you, because the other candidates for redundancy live in the same economic climate.

If you are going to appeal the redundancy, you need to know why you were selected.

I am not one of Anihilator's fans, but he is pushing you in the right direction here. Mostly.

grayclose31

Update.............

After apealing against my redundancy my apeal was upheld and i was reinstated. I was asked to attend a meeting the following day and i was advised that i was at risk!!!!!!!

For all of those who have contributed so far :-

I have today had it confirmed in a meeting at work that i am being made redundant.

There is a long story behind this and many details.

This is a statement i read out in todays meeting :-

Further to your letter dated 25th of January 2010 You confirmed that in this meeting you would like me to discuss ‘’any alternatives to redundancy that I may have identified.

At this time I can only suggest that *** seriously consider a compromise agreement rather than redundancy.

This is based on me advising you that if *** continue to pursue a redundancy – I will take out a claim for unfair dismissal.

It has been confirmed that I am being unfairly dismissed.

This is due to *** not carrying out the correct procedure throughout the redundancy process.

The decision to make me redundant is obviously unfair due to the decision to get rid of me was made before the initial notification of me being made redundant on 12/01/2010.

Here is a copy of an e-mail that was sent to me confirming that both you and ***** had decided to get rid of me in November 2009 because ‘’you don’t like me’’.

This is obviously unfair as previous meetings to this one ***** has confirmed to me that I was doing very well in my position and I had done nothing wrong whilst carrying out my duties.

I have also stated that my duties have increased due to my improving sales therefore the requirements of my position to carry out work of a particular kind have neither ceased or diminished or can be expected to.

It is obvious that the whole process has been wrong and therefore unfair.

I am about to lose my job and I have done nothing wrong.

If I am dismissed on grounds of redundancy I will pursue an unfair dismissal claim.

I would suggest that this meeting is adjourned and it is confirmed to me by 4pm what your next course of action will be.


However i have had it confirmed to me that if i reach this stage i should take out a claim for unfair dismissal. I have requested a comprimise agreement but i don't see it happening.

How do i start a claim for unfair dismissal?

Like i have said i have an extreemly good claim due to e-mails and the whole process not following proceedure. I also have recordings of all meeting surrounding my dismisal.

I have notified the company that i will persue a claim unless a comprimise agreement is forth coming.

Can anyone advise me of how to start the claim. My solicitor who advised me in the initial stages has comfirmed that any cost's would be covered on my house insurance if i where to loose but that is extreemly unlikley.

Any views or help would be appreciated.

Thanks

Anihilator

Um who is advising you?
I find their advice quite strange.

You have not been dismissed so can't claim unfair dismissal. If they start a redundancy process and you are scored lowest then they can get rid of you.

Tbh I think you are doing yourself no favours here as your communications are poor and don't really contain any substantitive evidence. Just your "opinion" which is as every bit biassed.

I'm surprised what you are proposing is even legal tbh. Its blackmail.

jdturk

I'm not sure how it would be unfair dismissal, as far as I can see they incorrectly made you redundant, you challenged this, they accepted this was wrong and now are doing it in the correct manner.

grayclose31

I have an e-mail from November stating that the sales director and the company owner both wanted me out because the sales direstor does not like me.

Obviousley this can only mean that their decision was made before any redundancy procedure weather they were carried out in the correct way or not. Their reasons for dismiss are obviously untrue.

jdturk

grayclose31 wrote: »

I have an e-mail from November stating that the sales director and the company owner both wanted me out because the sales direstor does not like me.

Obviousley this can only mean that their decision was made before any redundancy procedure weather they were carried out in the correct way or not. Their reasons for dismiss are obviously untrue.

they are stupid to do this but as long as they have done everything correctly whilst you may get a technical win your compensation may not be that high but then I'm not a lawyer so am only guessing and would suggest that rather than come on here that you keep listening to your proffessional