Does redundancy also mean letting you go and not strictly making redundant?

Mischa8

I'll be totally honest here, have been made redundant twice both jobs I didn't take seriously as was young and preferred clubbing etc (taking time off sick due to that) but my work was always impeccable. As detailed in references. I did find the work tedious too on occasion.

In 2nd redundancy I worked for, an architects our team had just lost big contract worth a lot and half company were let go (apparently happens a bit in architecture as when great it's great but lose work it affects company.

My friend at time I got made redundant said "oh another way of sacking you" to my redundancies.

So what do MSErs think that redundancy is another way of sacking eg getting rid of dead wood?

AP007

No redundany is not that at all - unless you are dead wood?

If you were dead wood they would just fire you and not pay you out with redundancy pay out at all. All they would need to give you would be a payment to cover your notice.

If they are making cut backs or not replacing people that is redundancy but if you get replaced by someone doing the same job then it's not a redundacy.

phill99

You need to remember that YOU haven't been made redundant. The POSITION has been made redundant. Work it out for yourself.

WestonDave

Undoubtedly! Sacking people these days is hard work, with all the procedures that you have to go through - on the other hand if you have a reason to get rid of a few, its fairly certain that the reasons you will have thought of sacking person X will make them come low on the scores which lead to the keep or bin decisions. People I've spoken to in the past in management positions have expressed the opinion that "there's nothing like a good recession to give you a chance to clear some dead wood"

If a business closes then everyone gets made redundant so no particular issue - if its downsizing and you get the chop, there is a degree of stigma because no company would want to get rid of really good workers unless it was really cutting to the bone.

AP007

WestonDave wrote: »

Undoubtedly! Sacking people these days is hard work, with all the procedures that you have to go through - on the other hand if you have a reason to get rid of a few, its fairly certain that the reasons you will have thought of sacking person X will make them come low on the scores which lead to the keep or bin decisions. People I've spoken to in the past in management positions have expressed the opinion that "there's nothing like a good recession to give you a chance to clear some dead wood"

If a business closes then everyone gets made redundant so no particular issue - if its downsizing and you get the chop, there is a degree of stigma because no company would want to get rid of really good workers unless it was really cutting to the bone.

Nah not true - I mananged a team and got made redundant and they split my job up and gave part to the other 3 in the team and my boss got 70% of my job and was just told 'get it done'.

WestonDave

I'm not saying its always the case - in your case they clearly felt they could do without someone in your role, but if you have say 20 secretaries and 5 are made redundant, the role of "secretary" hasn't become redundant, so the ones kicked out will be the worst ones and any that the boss wanted to sack but couldn't quite justify it will have a pretty good chance of scoring such that they get their cards.

AP007

WestonDave wrote: »

I'm not saying its always the case - in your case they clearly felt they could do without someone in your role, but if you have say 20 secretaries and 5 are made redundant, the role of "secretary" hasn't become redundant, so the ones kicked out will be the worst ones and any that the boss wanted to sack but couldn't quite justify it will have a pretty good chance of scoring such that they get their cards.

No that would be a money saving exersize as it was at my job. One gets made redundant and the others are told do the job or leave. Saves £30k

To sack 5 secretaries say you can just pick the ones who cost the most or who have the biggest benefits package etc

StephenM_2

AP007 wrote: »

No that would be a money saving exersize as it was at my job. One gets made redundant and the others are told do the job or leave. Saves £30k

To sack 5 secretaries say you can just pick the ones who cost the most or who have the biggest benefits package etc

Last time we had redundancies in my skill group I was in a team of 4. Two of them got made redundant, but I survived, as indeed I have always done.I was the highest paid in the team.

Sambucus_Nigra

Imagine you are a boss with deadwood and a shrinking profit margin.

Less income and less work, are you going to get rid of the dead wood or risk losing the staff that are more profitable?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work it out.

Mischa8

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

Imagine you are a boss with deadwood and a shrinking profit margin.

Less income and less work, are you going to get rid of the dead wood or risk losing the staff that are more profitable?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work it out.

Actually one company bought other in takeover wanted to bring new staff.

And other well they employed someone else to do mine and several others jobs. They made redundant I think in that case people they didn't like as well as for being dead wood.

So not blatantly obvious plus I was asking if it was sacking rather than redundancy.

Mischa8

phill99 wrote: »

You need to remember that YOU haven't been made redundant. The POSITION has been made redundant. Work it out for yourself.

See my other reply. They re-employed people in our posts whether under new titles I don't know as I couldn't be bothered going to ET.

A few architects did take to ET and got payouts.

I was just asking a question but some people are quite rude! Lol