Likely redundancy

getmore4less

Oh and as for me taking over the company, i'd have to buy out all the owners, if i did that i'd be left with no drivers LOL.

You don't buy it out but someone is "running" the show.

Identifying the persons or persons that actualy make the desitions or have the influence is key to "getting on" in any company.

After 4 years you must know who they are by now.

Are they driving this change if not who is and why

Who is driving the datamaster change

have you checked it out, they have a demo, and researched issues
http://www.datamasteruk.com/page2aaaaaaa.html


Also sounds like not doing the 2hr shifts gives you more options to get other work on those days.

unholyangel

Jobs are kind of short around here right now Especially for part time hours.

As for the company a new committee are elected once a year. They wont ever allow a controller to run things as they dont like being told what to do or how to do it! Most of them are older and set in their ways.

Plus employs arent permitted at the meetings, only owners.

unholyangel

I have arrived at work at 1am this morning to find a letter waiting stating that further to the consultation meeting held on monday 21st which was "to discuss proposals to vary your current terms and conditions of employment" and that they will be reducing my hours from 35 per week to 14 as of 27th march.

All they told me on monday is that he had came into the office for a "chat" (for 5 mins) saying that they were shutting the office (as detailed above) from midnight till 6am from sunday to thursday.

They specifically said that nothing would happen until they consulted the other employees and that it was unofficial at this stage and that those hours were being made redundant, not me.

In the letter, they have not mentioned redundancy at all and (correct me if i'm wrong) 27th of march is not a months notice (as is required for changes to contract terms). They have not consulted any employee regarding this in an official capacity.

I spoke to CAB thursday last week who advised that i could accept their "unofficial" offer of reduced hours BUT i could work it under protest and claim unlawful deduction of wages. I've had a similar issue with another employer before varying my hours of work (not reducing, just varying) and i know this is breach of contract and unless they're paying me for 35 hours, could be seen as unlawful deduction of wages as they cannot vary the terms and conditions of my contract without my express consent. Furthermore to the fact they havent given me

What i want to know is why there is no offer of redundancy in the letter or even any mention of redundancy.

unholyangel

Ok, spoke to both ACAS and CAB and both have advised me of the same.

I've to write a letter stating they havent given me the statutory minimum notice for changes in contract, that this is a fundamental breach of contract and that due to losing more than 50% of my wage/hours, is a redundancy situation.

They've also told me to specifically ask what is the effect on other employee's hours and is there not a scope to have a reduction in hours across the board so that no one suffers a substantial loss.

Apparently i've also to mention that as per our informal discussion (not consultation as they claim), they previously knew that such a reduction in hours was not feasible and i couldnt afford to keep the job on with even 24 hours (never mind 14), and that a reduction of my hours from 35 to 14 was not discussed at any point.

unholyangel

I know no ones responding but quite a few seem to be reading so figured i'd update.

Sent a letter off recorded delivery detailing what CAB and ACAS had advised me and that i am not able to accept their proposed contract variation.

Have to say i've had a constant headache since getting that letter on tuesday and since tuesday night, i've slept a total of 10 hours =/ Its just completely stressing me out, while i understand they're trying to keep radio costs down for drivers, I'm bearing the brunt of it. What might be an extra £4 a week per driver is the difference between having a job and paying my bills or being unemployed for me. If they had said "we're making you redundant" its obviously not ideal as i like my job but at least then i could make plans and look for another job.

As it stands i have no idea whether they'll wait till they can consult with the other employees, give me notice of dismissal, dismiss me without notice or even force the contract variation anyway (which if they do go ahead with it, will be in 3 weeks time).

I cant sleep due to the stress of worrying and when i finally do feel tired enough to sleep, i start stressing that if i sleep i wont wake up in time for work and it will give them an excuse to dismiss me without pay which is the reason i think they've offered me reduced hours instead of redundancy - so i would either quit or they could dismiss me and they wouldnt have to make a redundancy payment.

So much for employers having a duty of care towards their employees.

getmore4less

Do you have any layoff clauses in your contract?
They can reduce hours under that, but a reduction from 36 to 14(less than 1/2) would be a redundancy situation after a few weeks.

unholyangel

getmore4less wrote: »

Do you have any layoff clauses in your contract?
They can reduce hours under that, but a reduction from 36 to 14(less than 1/2) would be a redundancy situation after a few weeks.

No written contract which (i was informed by CAB and ACAS) means that there is no clause allowing them to vary my contract/hours and that even then, such a huge reduction could still be seen as breach of contract.

unholyangel

ok, another update. Sorry if i'm boring you already :P

They've offered redundancy unofficially as an alternative to reduced hours. They want a decision today as the office manager (who manages the wages) is due to go away on holiday on friday for 3 weeks.

I'm looking at at least £910 redundancy but possibly £1190 if they pay me for my unused annual leave instead of making me take it as part of my notice period.

Would this affect any claim for contribution based JSA? I've read through a few threads and my impression is no but i want to be sure before giving my answer.

By doing my in depth calculations, i'd only be £5 a week better off working 26 hours a week (another option they offered) and i'd spend more than that travelling to and from work. So ultimately, i'd be better off taking redundancy.

I'm concerned they're going to say they're not paying redundancy because i turned down their offer but i could always ask for this to be confirmed before i accept and if they say no, then i suppose i can always go down the unlawful deduction route.

As much as i like working there, they're doing whats best for them, not whats best for me and they refused my proposal to split the loss of hours across all employees by an equal % as everyone else said they couldnt afford to lose any hours.Maybe i'm being unreasonable but at this point, i'm functioning on an extreme lack of sleep due to the stress they've put me under not to mention a constant headache.

unholyangel

ok so back from solicitors.....

This is more to help anyone that may find themselves in the same position as i'm in (or for anyone who hates not knowing the end of a story :P) but its not just unfair, its outright illegal what my work are trying.

Basically i have two options, tribunal or take the redundancy. As a personal choice because i know they'd just look for an excuse to dismiss me in future and because it would make for (to put it politely) a frosty working enviroment, i've asked them to draft up the terms of the redundancy they're offering for me to sign.

On another note, he also said i have a clear cut case for constructive dismissal (which is handy to know in case they withdraw the dismissal to try and force me to quit) because of the way they have handled things.

I will (faithfully) update my thread to let you know the definite outcome of course. Just a bit daunting being unemployed as i've been working full time for nearly 11 years and never had a sick day in the past 4-5 years.

unholyangel

And it seems my turmoil is not yet complete.

I contacted the office manager on thursday night to let them know of my decision and asking for the secretary or chairman to draft up redundancy terms in order for me to sign.

I called the office on friday morning at 930am to get chairman/secretary's phone numbers and was told the office manager had already contacted them and they would contact me.

Saturday i receive a letter dated the 17th but postmarked the 18th that claims events happened differently to what they have and saying i havent contacted them as of yet.

This has put me on 2 paths of thinking. 1) They sent the letter prior to knowing my decision or 2) They're now going to turn down my acceptance of their VR offer.

What doesnt set my mind at ease is coming in tonight to find that it has been marked up on the calendar that no nightshift to be paid from 3rd april onwards and that someone else is scheduled to work the 6-8am shift in the morning that same week. For a company trying to save money (and this being the reason they are reducing the weekly office hours), it doesnt seem economically sensible to a) not have me work the hours they would have to pay me for (as i'm due 4 weeks notice minimum) b) then have someone else work those hours at extra cost to themselves as they would still be due me my weekly wage x 4 and annual leave due.

If further astounds me that they must have discussed my situation with at least 1 other employee before consulting me or even acknowledging that they have received my acceptance and will have the terms drafted for me to sign. Especially as from what i understand, if they dont get me to officially accept the redundancy until (for example) tomorrow the 14th March, then thats an extra 2 days they would need to pay as opposed to if they had gotten me into the office on Friday to sign then and there.

The office manager telling me to make a decision by thursday (telling me this at 1am on thursday morning)or i wouldnt be paid for the next 3 weeks and the meeting with the solicitor pointing out it wouldnt necessarily be a nice place to work if i took them to a tribunal without leaving first just clarified matters to me.