We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

Urgent question...hearing next week re redundancy

2»

Comments

  • skaatiii
    skaatiii Posts: 7 Forumite
    edited 27 January 2012 at 2:41AM
    yes but the reason for the 90 day HR1 was due to the business premises closure - which was announced 4 months before the premises closure, so the employer was aware of the number of redundancies - as there were more than 100 staff based there. The 90 day HR1 was issued 3 months before the actual site closed - therefore the employer DID know well in advance of the initial redundancies being announced and staff should not have been dismissed until that 90 days had expired.

    I was not informed of the meeting due to technical difficulties beyond my control so although invited did not attend - this has been accepted by my former employer and is not disputed, he has repeatedly agreed, in writing, that the first time I was informed my post was at risk was the 18th - which is 5 days after the HR1 was issued.

    So, if the employer knew the place of business was closing 4 months before the business premises closed and they issued a HR1 stating 90 days consult 5 days before I was notified I was at risk, then surely I am included on the 90 HR1 that was issued and I was employed at that site and made redundant 60 days before the business site closed - when no dismissals are supposed to take place before the end of the 90 days consultation period...

    If I am not on the 90 day consult, why not? The employer has, and still, emphatically denies any HR1 being issued for any of the redundancies - despite my having a copy!

    I believe my redundancy should have been 90 days consultation not 30 - am I correct?
  • getmore4less
    getmore4less Posts: 46,882 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper I've helped Parliament
    edited 27 January 2012 at 8:45AM
    So you have been made redundant allready might have been handy to mention that in the first post..

    What date? 60 days before an unknown date it telling us nothing.

    Were you paid PILON or given notice. what was the termination date.

    have you appealed with the employer.

    have you taken any other action. like start an ET.

    what "review" is this you have in the title.

    You need to document your case with a clear time line with actual dates of events, none of this x before y after z stuff.

    edit: just noticed the dates in the first post don't match later ones
  • SarEl
    SarEl Posts: 5,683 Forumite
    I know - I am giving up. The situation does not get any clearer. OP, you need to see a lawyer. Perhaps face to face may make communication easier
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 353.8K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 246.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 603.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.2K Life & Family
  • 260.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.