Expected to move

ceridwen

jdturk wrote: »

They would make him redundant at best if he refused to move for the job, at worst he is breaking the terms of the contract and thus could be dismissed

Probably true - but the chances are that they wont ever try to enforce this unreasonable clause in the first place. If they did try to enforce this - then..yep...he might well get made redundant or dismissed. However - he has the job for however-long they dont do this for and I doubt the DWP would try to sanction his benefit if the job ended in these circumstances (particularly if he has proof that he had the job for a couple of years to start with without that unreasonable clause being there).

"A bird in the hand" and all that..

inmypocketnottheirs

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Even 30 minutes drive to work isn't much of a commute.

Some people don't know how lucky they are!!

ceridwen

Debt_Free_Chick wrote: »

But, of course, he could always resign if that situation ever arose. Not ideal, but you can not be forced to move, unless you really, really want to take the new job (or the same job, but in a different location).

Quite - but I would advise against him "resigning" if it came to it. He would be best off waiting for them to make him redundant or sack him. If he "resigned" then the DWP would sanction his benefits for up to 6 months - hence the need to sit and wait to be made redundant or sacked that many employees have.

Debt_Free_Chick

ceridwen wrote: »

Quite - but I would advise against him "resigning" if it came to it. He would be best off waiting for them to make him redundant or sack him. If he "resigned" then the DWP would sanction his benefits for up to 6 months - hence the need to sit and wait to be made redundant or sacked that many employees have.

hhmmmmmm ...... not so sure. If you sign a contract with a mobility clause and then refuse to move, I think redundancy is unlikely.

I guess dismissal might be the route, but struggling to see on what grounds. Capability, perhaps?