Redundancy during adoption leave

avantra

I have a quick question.

If an employee is put under potential redundancy do the employer 'must offer' them alternative similar suitable employment if one is advertised by the employer or by other parts of the company?

Business link and other resource say they 'must offer'.

Quick call to ACAS and they told me that the employer 'can' offer alternative similar position if there is one advertised.

Who to believe?

princessdon

It all depends on what is "suitable"

Is it the same job, same pay, same conditions, same grade etc?

If there is an argument that it is the same - then yes under ACAS guidelines they are to minimise the risk of redundancy

If it is a different band, needs additional training, less hours etc - it is not automatically suitable alternative. Discussions between the two parties and an acceptance can make it suitable.

I just wanted to say though - that sometimes HR make errors - Eg I saw a "suitable" job when I was going through redundancy advertised externally and got myself if a right state - a phone call solved it.

marybelle01

The rights are exactly the same as for maternity - the word is "must" not "can". Parents on adoption leave must be offered any suitable alternative employment even if others are also at risk, before other candidates (unless there are two or three people with the same rights, in which case the employer must show a fair selection from amongst those with the enhanced rights).

I don't entirely agree with Princedon that the criteria for suitable alternative are quite that tight, but given there are no details of what you think is a suitable alternative it's hard to really say much about it.

avantra

marybelle01 wrote: »

The rights are exactly the same as for maternity - the word is "must" not "can". Parents on adoption leave must be offered any suitable alternative employment even if others are also at risk, before other candidates (unless there are two or three people with the same rights, in which case the employer must show a fair selection from amongst those with the enhanced rights).

I don't entirely agree with Princedon that the criteria for suitable alternative are quite that tight, but given there are no details of what you think is a suitable alternative it's hard to really say much about it.

As it is a specialist area it makes it easy, the same job criteria is used in the advert almost word by word from the original job description of the potential redundancy.

It is a senior position with the same grade and described as full time (again the same) with flexible hours arrangements.

The current position of the potential redundancy covers all the above plus a bit more but is in a different business of the same company.

marybelle01

Then perhaps as Princedon suggested you should be staking your claim to the job and telling HR that they have made a "mistake"?

caeler

ACAS is right. The employer can offer. But if they choose not to you may have the right to appeal and/or complain at an employment tribunal. My understanding is 'must offer' a suitable alternative. However I agree with princeton that the criteria is quite tight. If you feel you are not being offered something then you should ask why not.

Suitable alternatives can be missed, especially in big organisations. Or if there is some ambiguity such as the role being in a different sector it might require some research to determine if the role is a suitable alternative. Ultimately the business are offering you a position, not interviewing you so they will want to be sure they get this right. No excuse for not keeping you in the loop of course if you have already highlighted the role.

Best thing to do is ask the representatives who are consulting with you. Benefit of the doubt.