Made redundant and company says it can't re-employ me for six months

Steve1968_2

I was made redundant just over three months ago. A new role has been created which would be ideal for me but I have been told were I to apply there could be complications as "the law" says I can't work for them again for six months.

Can anybody point me at the applicable laws please? I understand the 3 months applicable for tribunal claims. I also broadly understand the tax risks for the tax free status of ex-gratia payments. I can find employer advice/best practice around leaving 6 months before re-employment but no specific "law".

My case is complicated (aren't they all?!) but this is not an attempt to dismiss/re-employ at a lower grade/salary etc and although some aspects of the role would be the same they account for less than 10% of duties...

In summary I'm looking for any statutes/case law that support 6 month rule or confirmation such rules don't exist.

Thanks
Steve1968

Sambucus_Nigra

Why don't you ask them what law they think this is?

It's probably an internal rule as I am not aware of any actual laws...and possibly to do with any redundancy payments.

LittleVoice

Steve1968 wrote: »

I was made redundant just over three months ago. A new role has been created which would be ideal for me but I have been told were I to apply there could be complications as "the law" says I can't work for them again for six months.

Can anybody point me at the applicable laws please? I understand the 3 months applicable for tribunal claims. I also broadly understand the tax risks for the tax free status of ex-gratia payments. I can find employer advice/best practice around leaving 6 months before re-employment but no specific "law".

My case is complicated (aren't they all?!) but this is not an attempt to dismiss/re-employ at a lower grade/salary etc and although some aspects of the role would be the same they account for less than 10% of duties...

In summary I'm looking for any statutes/case law that support 6 month rule or confirmation such rules don't exist.

Thanks
Steve1968

We cannot point you to statute to support the "six month rule" because there is no such law.

There may be an organisational policy which would require repayment of part of a redundancy payment (above the statutory redundancy pay) if someone returns within that period. That is not statute law but could be enforceable if contractual.

MatyMoo

I am sure there is no law, we had a girl made redundant from one position come back two weeks later in another role - she was a temp that time though.

Steve1968_2

Thanks all for the responses. Helpful to know there is no law - I suspect it is just a case of organisational policy.

anamenottaken

Steve1968 wrote: »

Thanks all for the responses. Helpful to know there is no law - I suspect it is just a case of organisational policy.

So apply formally and see what response you get.

Gentoo365

Some redundancy contracts state that the redundancy has to be repaid if you rejoin the company.

It is possible that this is to ensure that the money is a redundancy payment (and hence is tax free).

So the 'law' being referred to could be a tax law. However I am guessing.

Helen1971

It's not a tax law.

I've been following this thread with interest since I'm in a similar situation. Good luck, OP. I suspect that an internal policy is being dressed up as legislation by somebody who doesn't understand the difference.