Redundancy-Does how length of service matter?

dickydonkin

buel wrote: »

Thank you so much for the very informative answers!! Andy L mentions qualifications may be a possible part of the criteria, bearing this in mind i now realise that i have many more qualifications (gained outside of work) than when i started work in my current job 3 years ago, should i give them my updated CV?
Also, please could someone tell me the length of notice they will have to give me, bearing in mind i have 3 years service?

It is important that the qualifications you have are relevant to the needs of the business where you are employed.

System

It is important firstly to realise what redundancy is. It is not a catch-all word for getting rid of someone. It means that the company has decided that it no longer needs a particular job to be carried out, or decides it can do it with fewer people, or needs to do less of whatever the particular job(s) do, eg because of a shrinking market.
Having decided that a particular function needs to be cut back, the company firstly has to decide how many and which jobs it needs to lose. It obviously firstly looks at redeploying people into any existing vacancies, or seeing whether any of the individuals concerned might accept voluntary redundancy.
After that process, it comes down to selecting the particular people who are going to be made redundant compulsorily. That is where the criteria come in, because the process has to be capable of being demonstrably fair, and resistant to possible legal challenge. One method is to produce a grid matrix of names down the left hand side and necessary attributes or other factors along the top. The criteria used have to be relevant to the job. Having ticked or crossed all the boxes, the scores are added up, and 10 out of 50 or whatever are selected.

If the job is a skilled one and takes many years to master, then obviously length of service is relevant. If the job is easy to learn in a few hours any anyone can do it, 5 years of experience counts for less. Qualifications etc may or may not be relevant. Other criteria could be:

sickness record, particularly number of single days, eg on a Monday
disciplinary record
time keeping
fitting in to the team and company ethos
customer services manner
willingness to stay on late if required, cover, flexibilty, etc

But using a set of criteria may not always be relevant or possible. If they decide they no longer need the function of an Assistant Director General, they do not have to draw up a matrix looking at the qualifications and length of service of the doorkeeper or the accountant.

Almost anything legal might be relevant, it depends on the organisation. The fundamental point is that a company has the legal right to deploy its resources in the manner it deems best likely to meet its aims. The reasons for that decision are not challengable - it is the PROCESS that has to follow the correct rules.


Minimum notice periods:

• one week if you have been continuously employed for between one month and two years
• one week for each complete year (up to a maximum of 12) if you have been continuously employed for two or more years

BTW - "criteria" is plural. The singular of criteria is "criterion".

getmore4less

dpassmore wrote: »

It is important that the qualifications you have are relevant to the needs of the business where you are employed.

Also that you have notified your employer you have done them.

buel

Hi again and thank you for the brilliant advice given!! One question id like to ask please is when a company decides to make redundancies do they HAVE to offer voluntary redundancies before actually making said redundancies?

Andy_L

No, unless their T&Cs of employment say so.
It's probably a good idea as it may make for happier staff/cheaper redundancies but its not a legal requirement and could result in you loosing all your dynamic go-getter staff (as they are more confident about getting a new job) leaving you with your dead-wood staff

buel

Hi, please can i also ask if you are made redundant are you then allowed to see the criteria that was used?

System

buel wrote: »

Hi, please can i also ask if you are made redundant are you then allowed to see the criteria that was used?

No.
But if you challenge the redundancy at an Employment Tribunal the employer would probably want to produce everything he could in evidence that a fair procedure had been followed.

maria6259

This is how Notts County Council use a point system to determine redundancies:

Knowledge, skills and experience Definition: The definition should be based on the person specification for the job role and business case for future service needs. Evidence: The evidence used should be based on the skills analysis form, discussion with individual employees, EPDRs and learning and
development records. Scoring: 20 = highest (the employee's skills are exceptionally relevant and useful to the organisation)
1 = lowest (the employee does not have suitable or adequate skills to do the job)

Flexibility Definition: The definition should be based on clear requirements in the person specification for the post holder to work flexibly, including out of hours when necessary and on the flexibility to undertake tasks and duties that would reasonably fall within ‘any other duties of the role’. Evidence: The evidence used should be based on the skills analysis form, discussion with individual employees, the ability/willingness to perform different functions/duties, timesheets. Scoring: 10 = highest (the employee is totally flexible)
1 = lowest (the employee is totally limited to the duties expressed in the job description)

Qualifications Definition: The definition should be based on essential and desirable qualifications or equivalent listed in the person specification and business requirements. Less weight should be given to desirable qualifications. If no qualification is specified on the person specification maximum points should be given. Evidence: The evidence used should be based on EPDR and learning and development records and the employee’s personal file. Scoring: 10 = highest (for full qualification as specified on person specification)
1-9 = lowest (for part qualification or training)
0 = points for no specified qualification/unqualified.
If no qualification is specified on the person specification maximum points should be given.


Absence Definition: The definition should be based on the reasons, context, patterns and levels of absence recorded by the ESC from 1 April 2007 to date. Sickness absence does not include pregnancy related absence, disability related as defined by the Disability Discrimination Act and Industrial injuries accepted by the Council’s insurance section. Employees with less than two years service will have their sickness absence record pro rated to equate to two years. Evidence: The evidence used should be based on ESC absence records, absence management team records and management records. Scoring: 10 = highest (no absence)
7 = absence below trigger level
5 = meeting trigger point but informal action
1-4 = formal caution/warning
0 = lowest (final caution


Time keeping Definition: The definition should be based on information recorded by managers from 1 April 2007 to date. Evidence: The evidence used should be based on documented management records such as file notes, flexi records, time sheets and other record systems such as time master. If time keeping records are not kept maximum points should be given. Scoring: 10 = highest (excellent timekeeping)
7 = 1-2 occasions of poor timekeeping
5 = 3-5 occasions of poor timekeeping
0 = 5 or more occasions of poor timekeeping
If time keeping records are not kept maximum points should be given.

Capability Definition: The definition should be based on procedures informal/formal that have commenced and been discussed fully with the employee from 1 April 2007 to date. Evidence: The evidence used should be based on documented management records such as supervision files, EPDRs and other recording systems. Scoring: 10 = highest (no action)
7 = informal action
5 = first written warning
0 = final warning short of dismissal

Disciplinary record Definition: The definition should be based on information from 1 April 2007 to date. However in some cases this timeframe may have to be extended to include spent warnings given the employment context and the seriousness of the offence for example, safeguarding. Evidence: The evidence used should be based on documented records from managers, HR teams, employee procedures, monitoring systems and personal files. Scoring: 10 = highest (no disciplinary record)
7 = informal action
5 = first written warning
0 = final warning short of dismissal

Cost of redundancy Definition: The definition should be based on the cost of redundancy as per estimates of benefit prepared as part of the redundancy process. Part time staff will have their total years service treated in the same way as full time staff but to mitigate against an in balance in respect of relative cost of redundancy payments and pension, the actual cost should be rounded up to a full time equivalent. Those employees with the highest cost to release should score the highest in this section. Scoring: 10 = high cost
1 = low cost

Sadly I am also on notice that I may be made redundant.....

SarEl

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

No.
But if you challenge the redundancy at an Employment Tribunal the employer would probably want to produce everything he could in evidence that a fair procedure had been followed.

Actually - yes. You are allowed to see the criteria that was used and you are allowed to see what your score was. This is essential for any appeal procedure to be fair, and you cannot decide whether to appeal unless you are allowed to see the scores! You are also permitted to ask to see the scores of other workers against whom you were judged but only in an anonymised form, and if the number of people is very low then the employer may legally refuse this comparative data because it would make it possible for you to identify individuals even from anonymised data.

dickydonkin

SarEl wrote: »

Actually - yes. You are allowed to see the criteria that was used and you are allowed to see what your score was. This is essential for any appeal procedure to be fair, and you cannot decide whether to appeal unless you are allowed to see the scores! You are also permitted to ask to see the scores of other workers against whom you were judged but only in an anonymised form, and if the number of people is very low then the employer may legally refuse this comparative data because it would make it possible for you to identify individuals even from anonymised data.

SarEl I have just replied to a similar question on another thread and I was not aware that an affected employee could actually have access to someone else's scores in the selection pool - although you did highlight certain conditions.

Am I correct in assuming a union official can have access to ALL of the scores of everyone in a selection pool - irrespective of the size of the pool?