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

Sambucus_Nigra

Mischa8 wrote: »

Sambucus wasn't particularly nice or clever in another post - hence her snippy comment to me and mine back. That's all that was.

Eh?

Which snippy comment?

SarEl

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

Mischa8 wrote: »

You asked a question and got an answer from someone (me) who has been a manager, a director and a small business owner. Perhaps if you only want specific people to answer your questions you should direct your query to them and them alone.

I wouldn't worry about it Sam. Mischa8 has a short memory, which I don't. I recall exactly what they previously said about my advice. I only answered the post at all because of the lack of anything approaching manners in response to anyone who had already replied - and done so quite correctly!

AP007

KiKi wrote: »

Mischa - redundancy is when a position has been made redundant because the work is no longer there, or has been redistributed. If the position is made redundant, then the role holder will - obviously - no longer be required.

But as SarEl says, many organisations use the word 'redundancy' to get rid of people they don't want, as it's a fair reason for dismissal. Perhaps this is what they did to you, perhaps not!

It's only fair if you are scored and came lowest. I was scored against my staff and I was told I was the lowest but that couldn't be true so I asked to see the scores and was told if I wanted the month ILON I would not ask to see the scores, so I left it.

KiKi

AP007 wrote: »

It's only fair if you are scored and came lowest. I was scored against my staff and I was told I was the lowest but that couldn't be true so I asked to see the scores and was told if I wanted the month ILON I would not ask to see the scores, so I left it.

My use of the word 'fair' in the context of my post means fair in law. Redundancy is a reason for a lawfully fair dismissal.

Whether who is made redundant is actually 'fair' in feeling, will almost always be subjective. And in order to make someone redundant, you don't need to score them. Especially if there's only one role - and only one role holder - being made redundant. That's got nothing to do with fairness, just being in the role that's no longer required.

And even if there is more than one person being made redundant, what you consider 'fair' and what someone else considers 'fair' may be different. What are the criteria? Performance? Potential? Innate ability? Team cohesion? Competence? Behaviour? Qualifications? At the end of the day, if someone wants to get rid of you they will manipulate the scores to make it work - if, indeed, they even use a scoring system.

My point is that you don't have to score the lowest for it to be 'fair'. It will often be manipulated, and often a scoring system isn't required because it won't always be a case of 'too many people, not enough jobs' (which was your scenario, but not everyone's).

KiKi

I'd also like to clarify from Mischa's earlier post that I am not - and have never been - an employment lawyer. I work in HR, but on the L&D / talent / performance side, and my ER knowledge is certainly not what a generalist or employment lawyer would have!

Nicki

Mischa8 wrote: »

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.

So you were unreliable, didn't turn up for work when you felt like it, and probably also self certified and claimed SSP so dishonest to boot. Even if you produced absolutely perfect drawings in half the time of all your other colleagues, no way no how could you describe your work as impeccable :rotfl:

The most important quality of any employee is reliability - to turn up on time and every day, to do the job competently, to behave well towards their colleagues and clients. Anything else is just icing.

Mids_Costcutter

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

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

Does that mean that rocket scientists never get made redundant?:)

Sambucus_Nigra

Mids_Costcutter wrote: »

Does that mean that rocket scientists never get made redundant?:)

No - it means even rocket scientists can work out if they aren't worth keeping, they will be on the list.

HTH

getmore4less

Interesting turn on the thread,

At the end of the day it is not about the law, it's more about common sense.

Getting advice from legals is all well and good but in many cases most of their experience will be defending those that got on a list or made the list.

Allthough they are often employers/employees so have the real experience needed as well.

---

The trick is to understand how not to get on the list in the first place.

This comes from workplace experience.

The important thing to learn from a redundancy/termination situation is why they chose the people to keep, not the ones they choose to get rid off.
(one person terminations look at the reason for terminantion)

This is critical even if you are not chosen, you need to move up the pecking order so you survive the next round, there will be one.



What suprises me is the number of people that never see redundancies coming.

Any one that has any interest in the place they work should see the signs.

terra_ferma

getmore4less wrote: »

Interesting turn on the thread,

At the end of the day it is not about the law, it's more about common sense.

Getting advice from legals is all well and good but in many cases most of their experience will be defending those that got on a list or made the list.



Allthough they are often employers/employees so have the real experience needed as well.

---

The trick is to understand how not to get on the list in the first place.

This comes from workplace experience.

The important thing to learn from a redundancy/termination situation is why they chose the people to keep, not the ones they choose to get rid off.
(one person terminations look at the reason for terminantion)

This is critical even if you are not chosen, you need to move up the pecking order so you survive the next round, there will be one.



What suprises me is the number of people that never see redundancies coming.

Any one that has any interest in the place they work should see the signs.

sensible post
in my experience good companies don't get rid of good people.
to survive redundancy you have to be a good employee, working for a good company, otherwise.... just lucky.