New reduced redundancy notice period of 45 days-Is this the same for dismissals?

majorwally

I believe the government has reduced the "collective redundancy"notice period from 90 days to 45 days

Is this notice the same for dismissals?

I read on a government site that for dismissals your emplyer must give you one week for every year upto a maximum of 12 weeks notice (but was that the old rule)

Very confused!

I ask as a colleague has been threatened with dismissal and they gave 3 months as the notice period, which seems to contradict with the above.

Would someone be kind enough to explain if there is a difference?

anamenottaken

majorwally wrote: »

I believe the government has reduced the "collective redundancy"notice period from 90 days to 45 days

Is this notice the same for dismissals?

I read on a government site that for dismissals your emplyer must give you one week for every year upto a maximum of 12 weeks notice (but was that the old rule)

Very confused!

I ask as a colleague has been threatened with dismissal and they gave 3 months as the notice period, which seems to contradict with the above.

Would someone be kind enough to explain if there is a difference?

Redundancy is a form of dismissal, however . . .

I believe the 45 days is about consultation in redundancy situations.

Dismissal notice periods themselves still require a minimum of one week for each completed year of service (up to the 12 week maximum). If the contractual notice period is longer, then the contractual notice period applies. They cannot give less notice than provided for by statute but can (and must when contractually required) give more.

There is no change to that notice period.

hawk30

They are completely different things. If a 100 or more people are being dismissed by reason of redundancy, the employer must consult and such consultation must start at least 45 days before the dismissals take effect.

Statutory notice periods for dismissal are not affected.