We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 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!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Redundancy question
magyar
Posts: 18,909 Forumite
I'm hoping there are some people out there who might be able to answer a specific question on redundancy which is affecting someone I know at work.
He was told a long time ago (last February!) that his job was being phased out in a year's time and was told that redundancy would be offered to him (or an alternative job). At that time he asked for the terms of the redundancy but he got no reply for months, despite chasing regularly.
The terms have finally been presented and they are significantly lower than the company's terms had been in the past. (The company have since confirmed that their standard terms changed in April). As a long-serving employee, the difference is several thousand quid.
The company are claiming that redundancy payment is not contractual, and they are free to make whatever offer they like. However, various web links I've read use the phrase "established custom and practice" becoming an implied term of the contract, and that redundancy terms could come into that category. He is intending to use this argument to try and get the earlier terms.
Does anyone have any specific experience or know of any examples which might back up the argument?
Any advice much appreciated.
He was told a long time ago (last February!) that his job was being phased out in a year's time and was told that redundancy would be offered to him (or an alternative job). At that time he asked for the terms of the redundancy but he got no reply for months, despite chasing regularly.
The terms have finally been presented and they are significantly lower than the company's terms had been in the past. (The company have since confirmed that their standard terms changed in April). As a long-serving employee, the difference is several thousand quid.
The company are claiming that redundancy payment is not contractual, and they are free to make whatever offer they like. However, various web links I've read use the phrase "established custom and practice" becoming an implied term of the contract, and that redundancy terms could come into that category. He is intending to use this argument to try and get the earlier terms.
Does anyone have any specific experience or know of any examples which might back up the argument?
Any advice much appreciated.
Says James, in my opinion, there's nothing in this world
Beats a '52 Vincent and a red headed girl
Beats a '52 Vincent and a red headed girl
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards