unfair redundancy question

leonc888

Hi,

Firstly thanks for reading and giving your input.

My partner is int he process of being made redundant after 11 years in her job as the position is not needed anymore. (she is an admin assistant)

they have offer usual 11 weeks notice and 11 weeks redundancy payment but added if she signs a non disclosure agreement they will pay her another 6 weeks on top but would prevent her for claiming if she was to every try to claim unfair dismissal etc and this is standard and previous year some other workers was offered this also within the company when restructuring.

Now my main question is should she sign this agreement for the extra 6 weeks or do you think she may have a case for unfair dismissal as 3 years ago she went on maternity leave in which the company did not recruit to cover her work load but instead move it to another depot and on her return this work load which took up most of her time in her job was never given back to but instead got her to do other jobs within the company until now when they have bought a machine to replace the task she has been doing since return from maturity leave and she feels if her original work load was given back to her on her return from maternity this may of never happened and therefor thinks could this be unfair that this could of been avoided if she was given her work load she did before leaving for maternity.

So any input would be great

Guest101

3 years later? I'd say that's unlikely. Assuming she returned to same pay and conditions, then whether they recruit or not is up to them.

sangie595

leonc888 wrote: »

Hi,

Firstly thanks for reading and giving your input.

My partner is int he process of being made redundant after 11 years in her job as the position is not needed anymore. (she is an admin assistant)

they have offer usual 11 weeks notice and 11 weeks redundancy payment but added if she signs a non disclosure agreement they will pay her another 6 weeks on top but would prevent her for claiming if she was to every try to claim unfair dismissal etc and this is standard and previous year some other workers was offered this also within the company when restructuring.

Now my main question is should she sign this agreement for the extra 6 weeks or do you think she may have a case for unfair dismissal as 3 years ago she went on maternity leave in which the company did not recruit to cover her work load but instead move it to another depot and on her return this work load which took up most of her time in her job was never given back to but instead got her to do other jobs within the company until now when they have bought a machine to replace the task she has been doing since return from maturity leave and she feels if her original work load was given back to her on her return from maternity this may of never happened and therefor thinks could this be unfair that this could of been avoided if she was given her work load she did before leaving for maternity.

So any input would be great

Did she take the full 12 months maternity leave. If she took more than ordinary maternity leave then she wasn't entitled to return to the original job, only to one on the same terms. But as stated above - three years later she wants to complain? Not a chance.

maninthestreet

Take the extra 6 weeks money, sign the settlement agreement, and move on in life....

Takeaway_Addict

leonc888 wrote: »

Hi,

Firstly thanks for reading and giving your input.

My partner is int he process of being made redundant after 11 years in her job as the position is not needed anymore. (she is an admin assistant)

they have offer usual 11 weeks notice and 11 weeks redundancy payment but added if she signs a non disclosure agreement they will pay her another 6 weeks on top but would prevent her for claiming if she was to every try to claim unfair dismissal etc and this is standard and previous year some other workers was offered this also within the company when restructuring.

Now my main question is should she sign this agreement for the extra 6 weeks or do you think she may have a case for unfair dismissal as 3 years ago she went on maternity leave in which the company did not recruit to cover her work load but instead move it to another depot and on her return this work load which took up most of her time in her job was never given back to but instead got her to do other jobs within the company until now when they have bought a machine to replace the task she has been doing since return from maturity leave and she feels if her original work load was given back to her on her return from maternity this may of never happened and therefor thinks could this be unfair that this could of been avoided if she was given her work load she did before leaving for maternity.

So any input would be great

The fact her work was able to be moved around she should really be thankful for the extra 3 years work. The employer could have easily realised that she wasn't needed then and gone through the redundacy at that point.

As others have put...move on.

thorsoak

Just advise her, in these circumstances, to take the money and run! Hopefully, she will get another - better paid, better benefits - job pdq!

TBagpuss

3 years later is far too late to raise the issue. If she had raised it immediately on her return, then (assuming that she didn't take more than the 12 months leave) she might have had grounds to raise discrimination, but by working in the new role for 3 years, she has accepted that new role and new terms.

She can of course ask whether there are any suitable alternative roles for hre, but from what you say, it sounds like a genuine redundancy situation so if they are offering her more than she is entitled to she should probably take it and move on.

You mention that her previous tasks were moved to adifferent depot. Would she be happy to move to a diferent location herself? If so, then she could ask her employer whether there are any suitable roles available at other depots, but unless smeone else has left, there may well not be any such role.