Compromise Agreement

hcb42

they are paying the legal costs and £120....not £120 for the legals. I had a compromise agreement in 2001, it was about £250 for legals back then incidentally.

However, it isnt much of an offer! It's a bit insulting tbh.

how long have you been there OP. Wont they accept say not working any notice and a slightly inflated cash settlement. ....

SarEl

What the OP expects and what they get are two different matters. I can't help thinking that there is more to the story than we are being told. You earn £70k you say, and they are paying you nothing but notice pay - so you do not qualify for redundancy pay? And they are willing to throw in £120? So you seem to have few if any rights to fall back on - because otherwise they wouldn't be taking the mick. And they seem to be entirely unhappy with the thought of keeping you on in any form at all.

Care to share - what is really going on?

tigerlily44

SarEl wrote: »

What the OP expects and what they get are two different matters. I can't help thinking that there is more to the story than we are being told. You earn £70k you say, and they are paying you nothing but notice pay - so you do not qualify for redundancy pay? And they are willing to throw in £120? So you seem to have few if any rights to fall back on - because otherwise they wouldn't be taking the mick. And they seem to be entirely unhappy with the thought of keeping you on in any form at all.

Care to share - what is really going on?

I'm an HR manager and this seems distinctly off kilter to me.

The company I work for has been undertaking a significant downsizing exercise since April and all those taking the voluntary leaver package were asked to do so under a compromise agreement. Just the way the company does things so this is not necessarily sinister.
Redundancy obviously depends on length of service and the numbers being made redundant as this determines the length of consultation.
If the OP has more than 2 years service he would be entitled and generally even if they wanted to go down the compromise route (I would think because they want to foreshorten the consultation period) they would pay more than that in legal fees (our limit was £250 + VAT)

More info needed I think

tiger

SarEl

I agree entirely. It seems more likley this is a "sham redundancy" to hide something else - not very well. But obviously that doesn't mean the OP will get a penny more just because he thinks he should. Without the actual facts of what is happeneing and in particular why they don't want him back, and how long he has worked there, we can't help.

motorguy

There is no requirement for a compromise agreement for a common or garden redundancy.

There is something more happening here than we are being told.

OR the O/P is trolling.