We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Can compulsory redundancy be legally enforced?
Options

stickman
Posts: 163 Forumite
Can a firm/company,after asking for voluntary redundancies then impose compulsory redundancy if the uptake of voluntary was insufficient or declined?
Thanks
Thanks
0
Comments
-
Gosh that's an easy one. Yes, of course they can.0
-
So why bother asking for "volunteers" as surely it's cheaper just to pay compulsory terms.
Maybe because they don't want to have to force people out?The Googlewhacker referance is to Dave Gorman and not to my opinion of the search engine!
If I give you advice it is only a view and always always take professional advice before acting!!!
4 people on the ignore list....Bliss!0 -
With some employers voluntary is cheaper than compulsory.
If they have someone who's thinking of leaving, they can make an offer for voluntary redundancy, at a lower cost than compulsory.0 -
Voluntary redundancy means less hassle with having to assess the whole group to see who should be at risk and less likely of having to defend an appeal should the unfortunate party do so.
Also means they don't have to make say 2 out 4 redundant only to risk having person 3 leave in two or three months anyway because they were already looking for another role and were unhappy there.
Its a much easier and nicer process than going through compulsory redundancy.0 -
So why bother asking for "volunteers" as surely it's cheaper just to pay compulsory terms.
Assuming everything else is equal between them, would you want to get rid of a worker who wants to stay if the person next to them is counting down the hours to leave and would jump at the chance?If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything0 -
Thanks for the replies,but possible situ is,
Company want a set ammount reduction, only open to 50-55's,
all on good salaries. Normal retirement age 60. Rumour is there will be one set ammount put on table for people to go voluntarily regardless of the ammount of time you have left till you reach normal retirement at 60. Realise that some will take up an offer to go early probably those with the least time to do. However those with longer to do will have some thinking to do. Pension deferred till 60, then kicks in.
Also as stated company want set figure to go ,if after putting offer out they don't get the ammount they require to go,then according to some of the replies here, company will opt for compulsory redundancy.
Is that correct,if so, as is normally the case the voluntary option would be the better of the two, as it usually pays more than compulsory, or so I am led to believe.
Thoughts please.
Thanks0 -
This sounds correct to me.
Voluntary redundancy isn't like a vegas payout. It's a business offer - money in exchange for something. The money offered is either attractive or it isn't. For every person who opts to accept it - perhaps people who were thinking of leaving or retiring this year anyway might find it attractive - one less person will face compulsory redundancy which is a good thing.
You're right that if it isn't an attractive offer then people would be mad to take it if they'd be better off waiting for compulsory redundancy, and I don't know the legal position but I would have thought that they would have to offer at the very least the statutory redundancy payout due to people based on length of service, etc, which makes me wonder if what you have heard is incomplete. You say yourself that it's a rumour and you know how rumours are.
Would the set amount that you've heard about make voluntary redundancy more attractive for some people if it was that set amount ON TOP of the 'normal' redundancy for that person? Maybe they're doing that.If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything0 -
Thanks for the replies,but possible situ is,
Company want a set ammount reduction, only open to 50-55's,
all on good salaries. Normal retirement age 60. Rumour is there will be one set ammount put on table for people to go voluntarily regardless of the ammount of time you have left till you reach normal retirement at 60. Realise that some will take up an offer to go early probably those with the least time to do. However those with longer to do will have some thinking to do. Pension deferred till 60, then kicks in.
Also as stated company want set figure to go ,if after putting offer out they don't get the ammount they require to go,then according to some of the replies here, company will opt for compulsory redundancy.
Is that correct,if so, as is normally the case the voluntary option would be the better of the two, as it usually pays more than compulsory, or so I am led to believe.
Thoughts please.
Thanks
I should perhaps pint out that if this was compulsory redundancies all relevant staff would have to be included - you cannot select people based on their age alone, and any criteria for redundancy which is transparently age based is potentially subject to a discrimination claim.0 -
I should perhaps pint out that if this was compulsory redundancies all relevant staff would have to be included - you cannot select people based on their age alone, and any criteria for redundancy which is transparently age based is potentially subject to a discrimination claim.
Agreed,however the buzz is that the offer will be only "voluntary" for those ages 50-55 don't envisage any compulsory redundancies which,as you said would have to involve ALL relevant staff which is not what they are after, just those that fall within this age group.
So I suppose that if they don't get their required number of "volunteers" then they are just stuck with them. So the proposed offer would have to be a really good one then.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards