Complicated question - in redundancy as was unsure what thread to post in.

Bluemeanie_2

Hello,

I am new to these boards so was unsure to post this in employment or redundancy.

Bit of a complicated question and our HR department don't seem to have a clue.

I worked in a job, two positions came up, a position for a permanent senior and a position for a two year fixed term senior.

I applied and got the perm post (as I scored the highest at interview etc) and a colleague got the two year fixed. (there is already one other perm senior)

So there is me and A on perm and B on two year fixed.

HR are saying to B that your two year fixed is ending your employment terminates. HOWEVER he has over a years continuous service before he took the two year fixed.

He is arguing that as he has worked there for over two year, albeit in a different post previously, if they are reducing a post from three to two (even though it was only a two year post to start with). That me, A and B all have to sit in the same pot and be re-interviewed/redundancy process followed etc.

Is this true? (I hope not, otherwise making it two year fixed was pointless?)

Many thanks

Sambucus_Nigra

From the gov website:

Ending a fixed-term contract

If you are on a fixed-term contract, generally no notice of the contract reaching its end date will need to be given by the employer. However, failing to renew a fixed-term contract is considered to be a dismissal. You have the right:

• not to be unfairly dismissed (after one year’s service)
• to a written statement of reasons for the dismissal (after one year’s service)
• to statutory redundancy payments (after two years' service)
• to a minimum notice period of your contract ending before the agreed end date, task or event

The minimum notice period you are entitled to is:

• after one month’s continuous service, but less than two years: one week’s notice
• after two years continuous employment: two weeks’ notice if you have been continuously employed for two years

If your contract states you should have been employed for one month or less, but you have actually been employed for three months or more, you are still entitled to the minimum notice period of one week.
If you have been employed for one month or longer, then you must give your employer the statutory minimum notice of one week. If your contract states that you should give a longer notice period than the statutory minimum, then you have to give your employer this length of service.

It doesn't mean he is up for redundancy; it means that he is liable to be paid redundancy payments but not that everyone needs to be put on notice and go through the consultation process.

Bluemeanie_2

Many thanks for your help. So in essence, we are not be consulted etc. His fixed term contract will end, and he is entitled to redundancy payment. And me and the other perm senior will carry on?

Sambucus_Nigra

This is exactly what is happening at work at the moment. The staff that are coming to the end of their contracts are going through the process, and have been given notice that they are being dismissed as a result of their contracts ending; but the rest of us are not being put on consulation! They have all had to have meetings or phone meetings to inform them that it is happening. And they are being given time off for interviews etc, as if it was a redundancy. But that's it.

However I didn't know about the right to redundancy payments. They may or may not be getting those; probably if they are over 2 years service [and some are] they have been told not to discuss individual circumstances.

However it is worrying that your HR don't know this; are you discussing the situation with them at the moment? Do you need to point them in the direction of the gov website?

Bluemeanie_2

I don't know if I dare say this without opening a can of worms about the public sector, but I work for a local authority with 16000 staff! I am not in direct discussion with the HR department and will probably get told off if I try and show them the website. But I have been informed by my manager that I may have to "go in the pot" with A and B and be re-interviewed again, and get redundancy if I am not successful.

I am frustrated by HR as it is not as if we are a small company or anything and the local authority have dealt with redundancy a lot lately. I would expect such a massive team employing such a large amount of people to have a grasp of this. Oh well c'est la vie.

SarEl

I am sorry, but here comes another can of worms - he and your manager are correct and Sambucus Nigra is wrong. Sorry about that SN

It is not true that a termination of a fixed term contract after two years means his job goes and yours stays. This is a detriment under the Fixed Term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatement) Regulations 2002. An employee on a fixed term contract cannot be treated any differently from any other employee, which means that he has exactly the same rights to claim unfair dismissal or unfair selection for redundancy as you do. As a result, if you are doing the same jobs and one post (even if it is "his post" goes) it is a redundancy and he has the same rights to consultation, and competing for the remaining position as you do.

And if this happens and he clearly knows his rights I wouldn;t be expecting HR to get away with anything less than following the law.

Bluemeanie_2

Many thanks SarEl. I don't mind being re-interviewed really. All I find annoying is, if this is the case I do not understand them putting him on a two year fixed in the first place if it is not worth the paper it is written on. The service was only given the money for his post specifically for two years, but if legally the fixed means nothing and as technically they are reducing a post we all goes in the same pot it just seems silly. Oh well not to worry.

I do appreciate the help.

SarEl

Bluemeanie wrote: »

Many thanks SarEl. I don't mind being re-interviewed really. All I find annoying is, if this is the case I do not understand them putting him on a two year fixed in the first place if it is not worth the paper it is written on. The service was only given the money for his post specifically for two years, but if legally the fixed means nothing and as technically they are reducing a post we all goes in the same pot it just seems silly. Oh well not to worry.

I do appreciate the help.

I agree entirely. I have been saying for years (since 2002 - and to some extent before that) that fixed term contracts are a pointless waste of time and cause employers more problems than employees! Which they do! They are a hangover from the bad old days when employers routinely used one FTC after another to get out of almost all employment rights - FTC workers at one time could not claim unfair dismissal, did not get redundancy etc. The law, quite correctly, moved to stop all those shenanigans, but they have become to ingrained in employers cultures that they can't see that their usefulness to them has gone. It would be easier and simpler for everyone if we simply abolished them in law.

Bluemeanie_2

Thank you for all your help SarEl, and to SN for taking the time to read my posts and comment.

I am just glad I know what is going to happen, and hope HR figure it out sooner rather than later!

Sambucus_Nigra

SarEl wrote: »

I am sorry, but here comes another can of worms - he and your manager are correct and Sambucus Nigra is wrong. Sorry about that SN

Not at all; I'm just going on the gov website. As I'm on a fixed term contract, it is good news for me. So thanks

For future reference, is there a link that says all fixed term contracts are in fact redundancies?

KiKi

SN: any FTC that ends after 12 months is, officially speaking, a redundancy, as the unfair dismissal legislation applies to them, too. After 24 months they would be entitled to redundancy payments, as well. Directgov only mentions the 2 year payments, but the 1 year redundancy applies, too, as it does to perm staff.


SarEl, why should their FTC ending mean that the people in the perm positions are suddenly at risk? Is it purely because they are all doing exactly the same job?

KiKi