My role is at risk of redudancy... less than 2 months after 2 graduates were hired

avacado

Yes I don't doubt they have a negative view of me, and i want to leave if i can find something, and have been looking for a few months for something suitable

I'm just trying to delay being unemployed as long as possible, and thought there might be something in the fact they've recently hired loads of staff, and that I may have some bargaining tools if they have done anything uncosher.

But so far it looks like im pretty out of luck, so will have learned a harsh lesson in loyalty.

I dont take any superiority for my qualifications, just that I understood in redundancy it could be one of the criteria they look at when selecting people.

zzzLazyDaisy

avacado wrote: »

I dont take any superiority for my qualifications, just that I understood in redundancy it could be one of the criteria they look at when selecting people.

It is certainly a legitimate criteria. Unfortunately since you started after 6th April 2012 they don't have to use any criteria at all. They can bodge the whole thing up and tell you any cobblers they like.... because you have no right to complain to an employment tribunal (or anyone else) about the way you were treated.

Blame this government for its systematic erosion/removal of employee rights (I'll get off my soap box now...)

Bigmoney2

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

Blame this government for its systematic erosion/removal of employee rights (I'll get off my soap box now...)

I think you should stay on your soap box.

People are blisfully ignorant of how workers rights are being eroded, and the importants of trade unions untill its too late.

theoretica

Ask them for the redundancy policy. It is very likely to say something about seeking to move people at risk of redundancy sideways into internal vacancies. This might be a very good thing and you would get a different manager and might be a better fit.

Takeaway_Addict

Bigmoney2 wrote: »

I think you should stay on your soap box.

People are blisfully ignorant of how workers rights are being eroded, and the importants of trade unions untill its too late.

People are not ignorant, just more realistic that in the past few years red tape has stifled business and that it needs to be loosened for businesses to thrive.

ILW

avacado wrote: »

My start date was April 30th 2012, unfortunately after the 6th which i've now found out.



Barba - if you're interested. In February my 3 year old Niece died abroad from leukemia after finally getting a transplant in December. The shock to the family was huge and I took no time off for bereavement or stress and stayed to carry on with my work . My manager said if there is anything they can do to support let them know. Weeks later my brother who lost his daughter came home from abroad where it all happened, my mum had car trouble and asked me if i could take a day off short notice to help with the pick up at the airport. My manager denied this, even though she lets other people take time off short notice all the time. A few weeks later my supervisor pulled me into the office to say i was working slow and lacking enthusiasm (mind was very preoccupied)

.

That probably points to your problem. Most people would never even consider taking time off for stress due to teh death of a distant relative. You do not appear to have a good work attitude.

Wywth

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

I only read as far as 'I have been at this company for 15 months'....

Please tell us the exact start date, as this will affect the advice given.

Oh, I got a bit further. It appears the new boss doen't like the OP (according to the OP), and the the OP has already had a verbal about their "performance and capability" (whether or not that was subsequently withdrawn).

Also that the OP thinks they are being paid less than they are worth/job they are doing.

I think my advice would be to take the opportunity ... and the redundancy money (:beer:), ... to get out now.
Otherwise you will be continually swimming against the tide for a pittance in this position.

Wywth

avacado wrote: »

... Of course I denied this as its one word vs another.

You can deny all you like, but in my opinion, the writing is on the wall.

You may win the odd battle, but you'll never win the war on this one.

I suggest you make a strategic retreat ... and take whatever you legally can in doing so

zzzLazyDaisy

Wywth wrote: »

I think my advice would be to take the opportunity ... and the redundancy money (:beer:), ... to get out now.

The point of my question was to establish OP's legal rights.

Turns out he started after 6th April. He has less than two years' service, which means no redundancy money, and no right to complain about being dismissed.

Which rather makes all the other facts superfluous.

keystone

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

Turns out he started after 6th April. He has less than two years' service, which means no redundancy money, and no right to complain about being dismissed.

Quite even in the case of constructive or unfair dismissal. The qualifying period to be able to make use of an Emplyment Tribunal is two years - like redundancy pay.

OP - I am afraid you are probably going to have to accept that they want rid of you, the consultation process will have been (although very difficult to prove unless they made a complete hash of it) a sham as the decision had already been taken. Sorry Joe.

Cheers