Redudancy?? please help

KiKi

angelcake wrote: »

see can't even spell right :$ .. so close to tears again right now!!

...and breathe! Don't cry. Get a cup of tea.

To explain TUPE in (very) simple terms: someone is employed by Company A, working on Project X. If Company A loses the contract for Project X, and Company B win it, then Company B will usually take the employees working on the project via TUPE - simply that the work and people transfer to another company under protected conditions (ie, the new company can't immediately halve their pay, things like that). It sounds like it should be a TUPE because some of it is the same work that your OH was doing. It may not be a TUPE, of course - it may genuinely be a completely different contract, but going to tender and giving it a different name and having more properties doesn't mean that your OH shouldn't be transferred if his current work is part of that contract.

And that's why TUPE is a lot more complex in reality (I'm no expert, btw!). As SarEl suggested, see a solicitor.

(Edited out because as SarEl pointed out I was confusing the issue by posting something which made sense in my head but was explained very badly, and I don't want to confuse the OP!)

Getting a job - doing the SAME WORK on the SAME PROJECT - for another company without a TUPE or redundancy pay is not an option.

Call the solicitor tomorrow and get a free 30 min session just to get a perspective. Obviously you'll have to weigh up whether or not it's worth the cost. If your OH doesn't want to work for the new company (and therefore would like to avoid moving over via TUPE!) then he may as well just let the job with the current employer end and take redundancy. If it's not paid, then he can take the employer to a tribunal.

But breathe! You'll feel much happier once you've talked to a solicitor and can back up your argument with the current employer with some legal know-how behind you!

KiKi

KiKi

SarEl wrote: »

Ok. have it your own way. Obviously 30+ years as an employment law barrister has taught me nothing at all about employment law. I'm out.

I don't think her post was criticising you SarEl, simply that she doesn't understand TUPE and is upset and confused with it all so is making assumptions about the 'new' contract. You know that those assumptions are wrong, but she doesn't, and is obviously a bit frantic with it all! Sounds to me more like she felt she had explained badly, hence trying to re-explain and believing it was a 'new' contract when it wasn't.

But I'm sure it wasn't a slight on you or your advice, just a case of not knowing what's what - and let's face it, most of us don't know what's what in comparison to you when it comes to employment law!!

KiKi

KiKi

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

They can end a contract called 'strawberries' and call it 'raspberries' but if the work is still 'smoothies'

There are times when I love you.

KiKi

SarEl

KiKi wrote: »

. Even if the current boss *does* organise an interview with this new company, and even if your OH gets the new job, his current boss STILL HAS TO PAY REDUNDANCY. Getting him a new job doesn't mean he can't not pay redundancy money!

As others have said: he either loses his job, and gets paid redundancy (whether or not he gets this new job is completely irrelevant - if his current job is ending, then it's redundancy), OR he moves across with the contract under TUPE conditions.


KiKi

No it doesn't mean he still has to pay redundancy. That is why I keep saying it stinks to high heaven! Redundancy payments are due to someone who has been made redundant.He hasn't been made redundant! if he obtains another job before he is made rdeundant or outside the statutory notice period then he gets NO redundancy. He has resigned.

And without a TUPE transfer he also gets no continuous service and so can be scaked anytime in the next one (for now) year and the next two years (from April) - without the right to claim unfair dismissal.

Look OP. I know you are upset and I know that it isn't easy, but I also know this stinks. It is simply impossible for all the stuff the employer is telling you to be true! You know he is trying to shaft your OH but you would rather take his word for all this?

Look, this is very very simple. No matter what the boss says if your OH takes this job he loses everything. Redundancy and TUPE. One or the other applies, but the law presumes in favour of TUPE and both employers are going to have to prove that TUPE doesn't exist - or they are both legally liable! And if they can prove that (which I doubt) then taking another job now means your OH gets no redundancy money, and has lost his only protection against unfair dismissal.

SarEl

KiKi wrote: »

I don't think her post was criticising you SarEl, simply that she doesn't understand TUPE and is upset and confused with it all so is making assumptions about the 'new' contract. You know that those assumptions are wrong, but she doesn't, and is obviously a bit frantic with it all! Sounds to me more like she felt she had explained badly, hence trying to re-explain and believing it was a 'new' contract when it wasn't.

But I'm sure it wasn't a slight on you or your advice, just a case of not knowing what's what - and let's face it, most of us don't know what's what in comparison to you when it comes to employment law!!

KiKi

I know - I was just utterly frustrated at the fact that the only person she was listening to was the bloody boss - who I would trust as far as I could throw him. Which yes, would be about the length of a tribunal...

Sambucus_Nigra

KiKi wrote: »

There are times when I love you.

KiKi

Thank you. I like concepts

Emmzi

angelcake wrote: »

Thank you emmzi

must have been idiot terms I needed that makes perfect sense. I don't know why I misunderstand these things.. maybe with some sleep and clearer head I would be able to take it all in.

Thanks again..

No worries hon, only clear to me because I've been working on one this month! And *none* of the bosses concerned understand it until they get it in very plain terms too - it is very confusing!

KiKi

SarEl wrote: »

No it doesn't mean he still has to pay redundancy. That is why I keep saying it stinks to high heaven! Redundancy payments are due to someone who has been made redundant.He hasn't been made redundant! if he obtains another job before he is made rdeundant or outside the statutory notice period then he gets NO redundancy. He has resigned.

Yes, okay - I know what I meant in my head but I appreciate that it was very unclear and put very badly!

What I mean is: one or the other applies (as you've said), and yes, if he leaves before being made redundant to take the new job then yes, of course it's a resignation and he loses both.

Think I'll edit that from my original post as I don't want to confuse the OP (which clearly it has the potential to do!).

KiKi

getmore4less

First rule of employment

YOUR EMPLOYER WILL LIE.

Their own legal team will tell them to lie because most employees fall for it.

angelcake

Thank you for all this advice and to Kiki for explaning how I am feeling, it is so frustrating and upsetting, OH is trying to call a few people today but is getting told he will get a call back etc... Does any of you know who we can call on it to get proper advice please.

It has dawned on OH that the boss has turned, he was always a good boss so it just seemed untrue that he would do this to us.