Revoked redundancy... again and again....**Update**

Tygermoth

Hi all,

Could I ask your knowledgeable opinion on something?

Ok, last month my unit was made redundant. At the 11th hour I was taken aside and told mine had been revoked and I was sent to another unit at a different branch to help out due to long term sick. I was advised this was for a month only due to business needs and I was going to be back to being redundant.

I was then told (after I had moved over) that I was not being paid on my salary but the amin assistant role that I had taken over (6k less per year). this was a bit unexpected as two other unit members were moved to another team to help out but had no reduction. (anyhoo this is by the by)

Due the revocation of the redundancy (which I was advised was entirely above board) I lost the role I had secured at another company as they were unwilling to wait.

Roll on today, the month is due up next week I have been offered a fantastic job with a brilliant company that starts the week following and all is hunky-dory….

Except I have just come out of a meeting where I have been advised they are keeping me for another 2 months.

So basically they have made me go to a low paid role and extending my redundancy month by month… but when I advised I would just leave they invoked my 3 month notice period.

It seems they have all the cake and are getting to eat it too.

Is this all above board and how can I go about getting out preferably WITH my redundancy package?

Tygermoth

getmore4less

What notice do the company have to give you?
Were they going to pay pilon?

You need to read up on counter notice, plenty of threads on here that explain it, come back with any questions.

You should have refused the job as not a suitable aternative dues to the pay cut, probably too late now you have worked it for a month.


whats the package is it worth staying for?

kiddy_guy

The job is not a suitable alternative due to the fact it does not pay the salary. You can refuse it on this basis, unless they are prepared to match the salary.

SarEl

This may not be straightforward. You need to immediately serve counternotice - you must be in your statutory notice period since your redundancy date has passed, and you must definitely do so before the four weeks trial period is completed. Tell the employer that you have obtained other employment and wish to leave under the terms of your redundancy, and that you are rejecting the job that you are currently doing as not a suitable alternative because the pay is substantially below that of your job. You should never have accepted the new position in the first place - you should have served counter notice as soon as you had a job offer and were within the statutory notice period - the employer could not at that point have done anything about it. If the employer refuses your redundancy pay then I am afraid that you will have no choice but to lodge a tribunal claim and hope that They find in your favour. It is probable that they would providing that you have not exceeded the four week trial period - but you must act immediately to serve counter notice.

getmore4less

Roll on today, the month is due up next week I have been offered a fantastic job with a brilliant company that starts the week following and all is hunky-dory….

Except I have just come out of a meeting where I have been advised they are keeping me for another 2 months

Missed the bit where the month is up next week.
So there is a good chance that less than 4 weeks have passed since the new job started.

fred7777

Tygermoth wrote: »

Is this all above board
Tygermoth

No non of it is above board in my opinion.

First thing to bear in mind is that legaly speaking the post is made redundant not the person so if the original post you had doesn't exist anymore you could be redundant.

Second thing is that alternative positions offered should be suitable alternatives and -6k isn't that. This definitely isn't "by the by".

Thirdly where are they getting the three month notice period from? If its from your original contract which specified a different job at a different rate and in a different place they might not have a leg to stand on.

Finally what sort of process and consultation did you have? There are legal steps they have to go through and it sounds like they didn't. This which could be in your favor at a tribuneral.

Take copies of everything on paper and a written time line of events to the CAB to get their opinion ASAP.

SarEl

Sorry, But what?

fred7777 wrote: »

No non of it is above board in my opinion.

First thing to bear in mind is that legaly speaking the post is made redundant not the person so if the original post you had doesn't exist anymore you could be redundant. I think we had established that point in the OP - the bit that said that the unit was made redundant and at the 11th hour the notice was revoked. Which in itself if perfectly legal.

Second thing is that alternative positions offered should be suitable alternatives and -6k isn't that. This definitely isn't "by the by". It is if the OP didn't object to the position as not being a suitable alternative employment. By going to work in the job the OP has, in law, concurred that it is a suitable alternative position and unless s/he stops this in its tracks before the end of 4 weeks it will be set in stone that it is. Alternatives which are substantially different in terms and conditions from the original position can certainly be offered - or accepted, but they cannot be forced on an employee if they reject them and refuse. The OP didn't refuse.

Thirdly where are they getting the three month notice period from? If its from your original contract which specified a different job at a different rate and in a different place they might not have a leg to stand on. Well the OP has already said that s/he has a three month notice period, and in the absence of anything to the contrary, whether s/he has changed jobs or not then that is the notice period. Luckily, it isn't at all relevant because s/he has served his /her notice period - it does not restart during the trial period, and therefore must now be completed since the redundancy was "at the 11th hour" when she was offered this position and nearly four weeks has subsequently passed.

Finally what sort of process and consultation did you have? There are legal steps they have to go through and it sounds like they didn't. This which could be in your favor at a tribuneral. How on earth can you deduce this since the OP has not asked about nor mentioned anything relating to the process. And the process undertaken has absolutely nothing to do with the circumstances or questions outlined in the OP. And there is no "e" in tribunal. The tribunal that she hasn't got to, and which would not actually be considering whether the selection / process was fair or not since these are totally different grounds than the ones that the OP needs to claim!

Take copies of everything on paper and a written time line of events to the CAB to get their opinion ASAP. Hah - good luck with that. Some CABx are fortunate enough to have specialist employment law advisors, but 98% of them do not. The ones that do have waiting lusts as long as your arm.

OP - you simply do not have the time to dither about with this advice which is irrelevant in almost every detail to your circumstances. If you complete the four weeks employment in this new job without rejecting it and serving counter-notice then your claim will fail because any tribunal will not have jurisdiction.

Even then is is not clear cut - because your redundancy was allegedly revoked (i.e. withdrawn) then you are on slightly shaky grounds. You could never have been forced to take a lower paid job and your employer could not have revoked the redundancy, so at the very least your acceptance of this situation sugests that you have in law accepted the post as a potentially suitable alternative employment - which you are allowed to do even though it is lower paid. Your employer cannot force this, but you can choose it, and many employees do to avoid losing their job altogether. Having done so your only window of opportunity is the 4 week trial, which isa legal right whether mentioned or not by the employer. If you do not refuse the job during that period then you have accepted it as a suitable alternative and your right to redundancy money goes out of the window. I am afraid that ignorance of the law is never a defence - so the fact that you may not have known or been told these things isn't relevant to the law. So you must write immediately to the employer rejecting the alternative job offered because it is not a suitable alternative because it is lower paid / of lower status than the job you had; stating that you have the right to do so because you are still within the 4 week trail period; and serving counter-notice to leave. (pick a date - the employer cannot unreasonably refuse, but I would suggest going for the end of the 4 week trial). Rtaher than get into a protracted argument about whether or not you can do this, I would simply ask when you can expect your P45 and redundancy pay, accrued holidays etc and leave it to them to refuse if the are going to. You will then have to start tribunal proceedings for unalwful deduction of wages and refusal to pay redundancy payments. I doubt, unless they have more money than sense, that it would ever get to a tribunal. But they will probably try intimidating the hell out of you first before they pay up - with the best will in the world, they have obviously worked out that you haven't a clue and have exploited that to put you in a position that you shouldn't ever have been in, so it may take them some time to realise that you have wised up.

Caroline_a

OP - listen to SarEl.... she's the expert!

Mrs_Optimist

Ditto above, hope OP comes back and reads SarEl advice soon before the 4 weeks expire...

getmore4less

have pm'd just in case they forgot to look.

Tygermoth

Hi everyone,

(and thanks to getmore4less for the PM)

Sorry i looked in on the thread the other day and there was only one reply.

I will review fully and come back in a min.