Is my employer allowed to reduce my hours

kelise

Hi

I need a bit of advise.

My dad`s boss has told him today that he has to now work 3 days instead of 5 days.

My dad told him he couldn’t afford to have his wages/hours cut and that he must have some rights. His boss got the hump and walked away.

I have asked my dad to see if they have a signed contract at all to see what it says in there as I know that will have something to do with what rights he has. However He doesn’t seem to think he has ever had a contract but he has been there 15 years.

What are his rights if he does not have a contract stating his working hours are 40 hours a week. If he does have a contract what are his rights with this too.

Thanks

Jarndyce

His rights are the same whether or not he has a written contract, because if he has worked 5 days a week for 15 years those are clearly his contracted hours.

So, his rights are that he can refuse to agree the change. The employer can then choose to either back down or give contractual notice to change the hours (the same notice as if he were to be dismissed - if he has no written contract then this is likely to be 12 weeks). If they do that, then he has the right to claim unfair dismissal. Or he can resign and claim constructive dismissal. Or the employer could just sack him when he refuses the change - if they have a genuine reason for seeking the change (eg financial reasons) they may well get away with it.

So all in all not an enviable position to be in. If this is for economic reasons the writing may well be on the wall and he may be advised to look for pastures new anyway.

getmore4less

Any history of layoff short hours etc.

I think this would come under redunancy.

kelise

Yes his boss made some people redundant then took them back on.

Would they have to make him redunant if he will not accept the shorter hours. ?

ceridwen

Would OP's dad be covered by the fact that in a redundancy situation - employers are allowed to offer jobs that are deemed to be a "reasonable alternative" - but cant force people to accept ones that ARENT said "reasonable alternative"?

As my understanding of a "reasonable alternative" job has to include the same number of hours - and this clearly wouldnt be (ie its a position that is only about 60% of the hours of his current one) - that they therefore couldnt impose it on him as being a "reasonable alternative".

Personally - I would be saying "Its NOT a reasonable alternative position - because its shorter hours. Therefore - either find me a reasonable alternative position or, if you cant, then make me redundant". My reading of the law is that one cannot be forced into a shorter hours position if one is prepared to be made redundant instead and that employers get away with shortening peoples' hours because those employees dont wish to be made redundant and would rather have "half a loaf than none".

getmore4less

It is not unknown for employers to tell their employee take the cut or you will be seen to have resigned(even local authorities are doing it) to scare them to accept and never offer the alternative of redundancy.


Redundant and reemployed is not the same as lay off or short working.


I think the first step is to establish they can't use layoff or short hours under contract and get them to look at this as a potential redundancy situation and consult over the options.

A key factor will be how many are involved, lots of senarioes when there are a few involved.

ceridwen

A heck of a lot of employers do use Scare Tactics - and threaten things that they know very well they arent legally allowed to do (and hope their employees dont realise this and fight back).

So - I'm not at all surprised at the number of employers who try to make out that "You will be deemed to have resigned if you dont accept being moved to a part-time job". However - my feeling is that it would be well worth while consulting a legal bod to check whether this would indeed be deemed to be a "resignation".

What these Scarer Employers will be trying to do here is playing on the fact that most of us know that the DWP won't hand over any benefit for up to 6 months if we resign from a job and hoping we believe them when they say "It would be a resignation".

Personally - my feeling is they are bluffing. In those circumstances - I would get in a letter to my employer stating "I note that you are making me redundant from my current position with effect from x date. I further note you are offering me an alternative position as part-time (x hours per week) as a xxxxxxx. This is not a "reasonable alternative position" - as I am a full-time employee. I am willing to accept a proper "alternative position" (ie a full-time one) should I be offered one by yourselves".

The exact wording of that letter would need to be checked out with the Union and/or a legal bod to ensure that the DWP couldnt possibly turn it on its head and say that it was a "resignation". It would have to be made VERY VERY clear indeed that the employee intended to hold onto their job and was prepared to accept a "reasonable alternative position" - but the part-time position didnt constitute that.



*****************

Copies of all letters to be kept on hand - in case of need to:
- prove to the DWP one hadnt "resigned"
- prove to a Tribunal that one hadnt been offered a "reasonable alternative position" and it was therefore redundancy and get the Tribunal to force the employer to hand over due redundancy money.