job is going, told not at risk but don't trust them

happyc84

Hi,

Been working for a few years, but never seen this before.
Company has a reorganisation, that's fine, that's what they do.

One big part of the business is shutting down, they are all at risk. Been told that because of the big part shutting down, we have to reapply for jobs in new structure.


I would like to have been given the option to leave with a pay-off, and let someone else fight for the new posts.

Has anyone else been in a similar situation?

sangie595

No - but unless they are planning voluntary redundancy then leaving with a pay off is not an option. It might be a preference, but not an option - the employer does not have to offer this. The situation you describe is very common - if you don't apply you don't get redundancy. You would then have to attempt to persuade an employment tribunal to agree with your reasons for not applying / taking a suitable alternative role.

getmore4less

Using the must apply is a bit of a con as it can be used to avoid certain parts of the redundancy process.

If your job exists there should be a selection process and for new jobs all should be assessed for the jobs as a suitable alternates and selection process if too many suitable candidates.

happyc84

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback, I have a 1-2-1 next week about what jobs I can apply for, while at the same time the company are offering enhanced severance package to others in the original lay-off. As I'm in a union I'm hoping for the same level of package that was offered to the earlier lot.
Feedback for other workers is that we were told no money for redundancies this time, (surely depends on employment law, and not some boss) so will need to keep all options open.

If they do relocate the job to another site is there a limit on how far the job can be from the current post? Nothing in contract says anything other than normal place of work.

Thanks

sangie595

Boing backwards, there is a broad limit for relocation of 90 minutes or 50 miles each way, but like anything else, what that may mean for individuals can depend on the circumstances. But even without a relocation clause, an employer can generally relocate within that broad criteria.

And I am afraid that actually if there is no money for redundancies (which may mean enhanced redundancy pay - which is definitely up to the employer, and very hard to enforce a previous deal on a current situation) then it isn't as simple as being up to the law. "Some boss" can actually have significant sway over how the employment is reframed to avoid redundancies. But without any details, there are too many ways of doing this to comment. Your union really is the best place for advice, and it's fortunate that you are a member. If there is a deal to get, they are the ones to get it.