Employee problem can we cut her hours ?

mysillyolddad

getmore4less wrote: »

Check the contracts for ability to vary hours or do anything.

Check records for any break in employment that could reduce the continuity.

with 3 years redundancy would be 3 weeks pay or less if they are paid over £400pw(unless over 41)

depending on the contract statutory notice is also 3 weeks but you could use outstanding holidays which you would have to pay anyway to cover some of that.

So the max this will cost is 6 weeks pay and it could take that long to remove then any other way. if they are useless then you are paying them to do nothing anyway , might be worth a redundancy with PILON to get shot imediately.

Have plans in place to change all the locks alarm codes etc.


If the plan is to do the work anyway I would be there all over them like a rash.


What is the plan for future holiday and sick cover?

Wow thank you all I have relayed all the info

She is going to carry out a staff training evening with all 7 staff present
Explain clearly company proceedures and issue all with minutes of the training session and ask them to sign that they have received them
Then shes going to hold the first of future individual annual performance reviews
She will use this to highlight the poor selling performance of the 2 in question
Then give written warnings if small breaches occur but a final written for misconduct if either of them opens late again or fails to improve their newly set sales targets
My friend has a friend working on how to show clearly the performance figures of the whole team,enabling her to highlight that they are letting their colleagues down too

Hopefully this will cover her,she is sure that if she gives them enough rope they will hang themselves :eek:

mysillyolddad

Personally i'm convinced they are working "to rule" because they are friends with the old manager
God know's wny because they retited voluntary but they really are seeming to be only doing what is essential :-(

Sambucus_Nigra

mysillyolddad wrote: »

Wow thank you all I have relayed all the info

She is going to carry out a staff training evening with all 7 staff present
Explain clearly company proceedures and issue all with minutes of the training session and ask them to sign that they have received them
Then shes going to hold the first of future individual annual performance reviews
She will use this to highlight the poor selling performance of the 2 in question
Then give written warnings if small breaches occur but a final written for misconduct if either of them opens late again or fails to improve their newly set sales targets
My friend has a friend working on how to show clearly the performance figures of the whole team,enabling her to highlight that they are letting their colleagues down too

Hopefully this will cover her,she is sure that if she gives them enough rope they will hang themselves :eek:

What a faff.

The work is not enough to go round, evidently - so just make them redundant.

It's one thing making sure you are legal, it's another going round the houses and wasting time when proper work could be being done.

mysillyolddad

But to make people redundant does she not have to go through an even more confusing process ?

Sambucus_Nigra

mysillyolddad wrote: »

But to make people redundant does she not have to go through an even more confusing process ?

No.

She needs to follow the steps; inform them all that 2 roles will go [called consulting with the staff], and use a selection method that favours timekeeping and sales [amongst other things] and as they will score less points than the others they will go.

Here's a link that will help

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/your_money/employment/redundancy_an_introduction/redundancy___procedures_your_employer_must_follow.htm

Emmzi

I agree, I'd go for redundancy, and I wouldn't say 2 roles, I'd say "x many hours."

CFC

Redundancy is the only certain way to get rid of them - especially as they may pick up their performance and she still wants rid. It's worth every penny.

SandC

I completely agree, she's putting herself for a hell of a lot of work when she doesn't need to. Although all the things she is planning on doing is certainly good practice for the future.

I also agree that the 2 employees concerned may well toe the line once they see that their performance is being monitored. She needs to decide whether or not she needs these employees and the expense of their salaries when not five minutes ago she seemed to think she could easily cover the work herself. No point paying people who aren't necessary! Just because she might make positions redundant doesn't mean that in the future circumstances may change and she may require staff again - it's not a permanent and final thing if that's what she's worried about. Someone in the know I'm sure can tell us what the legal standpoint is on timings of rehiring again (small businesses face these issues all the time - they have to let people go when business is slow but may need to take on again when it picks up - my own business had to let a lot of people go in the middle of the recession but we have since taken 70% back on again - some the same people, some new ones).

getmore4less

SandC wrote: »

I completely agree, she's putting herself for a hell of a lot of work when she doesn't need to. Although all the things she is planning on doing is certainly good practice for the future.

I also agree that the 2 employees concerned may well toe the line once they see that their performance is being monitored. She needs to decide whether or not she needs these employees and the expense of their salaries when not five minutes ago she seemed to think she could easily cover the work herself. No point paying people who aren't necessary! Just because she might make positions redundant doesn't mean that in the future circumstances may change and she may require staff again - it's not a permanent and final thing if that's what she's worried about. Someone in the know I'm sure can tell us what the legal standpoint is on timings of rehiring again (small businesses face these issues all the time - they have to let people go when business is slow but may need to take on again when it picks up - my own business had to let a lot of people go in the middle of the recession but we have since taken 70% back on again - some the same people, some new ones).

There is none,

business is overstaffed then genuine redundacy
business is understaffed then genuine hireing

as long as they are independant.

The example often used is a new contract happens the day after people were made redundant needing new people. be a problem if you could not hire.

It can be wise to leave it 3 months to avoid any potential ET, even if you won't lose a case it will take time and potential money to defend.


This would be a good time to do a full review of contracts and performance of everyone getting some decent processes in place at the same time.