Little advice MUCH Apprecitated. :)

greenglide

The contract that he signed (did he sign it?) sounds like a "comprise agreement". They are used in redundancy situations where the employer wants to get rid of someone irrespective of employment law. In return for surrendering his rights (and usually agreeing not to tell anyone about the terms of the agreement) the company usually hands over a decent sum of money. They normally have an initial agreement not to say the agreement was offered even if it is rejected.

Sometimes used to buy off union reps etc and cases where employer has done wrong.

I would expect it to be drafted correctly so it cannot be challenged. Does he have a copy? He should have.

It sounds like a pretty much done deal.

claireda

greenglide wrote: »

The contract that he signed (did he sign it?) sounds like a "comprise agreement". They are used in redundancy situations where the employer wants to get rid of someone irrespective of employment law. In return for surrendering his rights (and usually agreeing not to tell anyone about the terms of the agreement) the company usually hands over a decent sum of money. They normally have an initial agreement not to say the agreement was offered even if it is rejected.

Sometimes used to buy off union reps etc and cases where employer has done wrong.

I would expect it to be drafted correctly so it cannot be challenged. Does he have a copy? He should have.

It sounds like a pretty much done deal.

He has not signed anything as yet. They have told him today that by Monday they will have the contract for him to sign if he agrees he can leave on the same day with his pay off.
Thanks for your reply, it is helping it all make sense.

Debt_Free_Chick

My understanding is that a Compromise Agreement is only valid & legal if the employee takes their own advice from a solicitor or their choice.

ACAS has a guide (they're now called Settlement Agreements) here

Your father should definitely be getting independent legal advice. He should ask for time to take the agreement away and read it. On no account should he sign it there and then - although if he does, it's almost cerainly not enforceable.

mgdavid

A compromise agreement is usually at least as generous as redundancy if not more so (his silence has a price). At his age and service statutory redundancy would be 10.5 weeks salary and it is commonplace to give pay in lieu of notice as well, which might be another 2 to 4 weeks pay. No way should he agree to 8 weeks pay, he should ask for 20, and I'll bet he'll get it too, wihtout much argument or resistance as it sounds like the company is on a sticky wicket. AIUI he is entitled to have somebody listen in on meetings with Personnel, could be his solicitor or a work colleague of his choice who would be impartial.
He has absolutely nothing to lose by asking.

rpc

ACAS has a guide (they're now called Settlement Agreements) here

Call ACAS.

They are usually very good and a small amount of time spent on the phone with them would probably help your father greatly.

atush

Your father needs independant advice. as this 'compromise' agreement sound shaky at best.

Under employment law I don't believe they can do what they have done. He would need to have been warned and done something wrong to be demoted and paid less as he was.

Plus how long has he worked there? It could be he is due more than 8 weeks pay, and to get rid of him they'd have to offer more.

Tell him not to sign, if he did sign, he needs an employment law specialist as he may have a claim against this company.

greenglide

as this 'compromise' agreement sound shaky at best.

If "done properly" these are used to buy silence and to stop the company from being open to employment tribunals etc. There "ought" to be a sizeable sum of money being offered though.

rpc

greenglide wrote: »

There "ought" to be a sizeable sum of money being offered though.

If there isn't, then it isn't usually worth having a compromise agreement!

I've only ever come across two types of use.

1 - Employee messed up. Employer may have done too, or may not want news of the mess up to get out. They are used to ensure the employee goes quietly (often with a good reference) and nobody will talk about whatever happened. Not too much money in this case, depending on how badly the company handled it.

2 - Employer has messed up big time, wants the employee gone. Mucho mucho dinero given in exchange for employee keeping their mouth shut and waiving their right to go to court or tribunal.

From the ACAS link provided earlier:

For the settlement agreement to be legally binding the following conditions must be met.

• The agreement must be in writing.
• The agreement must relate to a particular complaint or proceedings.
• The employee must have received advice from a relevant independent adviser, such as a lawyer or a certified and authorised member of a trade union.
• The independent adviser must have a current contract of insurance or professional indemnity covering the risk of a claim by the employee in respect of loss arising from the advice.
• The agreement must identify the adviser.
• The agreement must state that the applicable statutory conditions regulating the settlement agreement have been met.

Employees should be given a reasonable amount of time to consider the proposed conditions of the agreement; the Acas Code of Practice on settlement agreements specifies a minimum of 10 calendar days unless the parties agree otherwise.

Sounds like the company might have one, two at best of those boxes ticked?

Call ACAS!

atush

greenglide wrote: »

If "done properly" these are used to buy silence and to stop the company from being open to employment tribunals etc. There "ought" to be a sizeable sum of money being offered though.

Can't see how this one was Done properly having not agreed the statutory amt of redundancy, and having demoted and paid the employee less while not following a proper disciplinary procedure.

rpc

atush wrote: »

Can't see how this one was Done properly having not agreed the statutory amt of redundancy, and having demoted and paid the employee less while not following a proper disciplinary procedure.

"Done properly" usually means paying out enough money to compensate for the breaches in employment law.

It should be redundancy plus PILON plus hush money. The hush money cancelling out the demotions, contractual breaches and failure to follow disciplinary process.