Unfair redundancy

Buffycat

myself and a colleague have been put at risk of redudancy. We feel we have been unfairly targeted because of our age. We are in our 40s and 50s and together we have almost 50 Years' professional experience. We are also two of the longest serving. We are two of around eight people doing the same job - many of whom are on freelance contracts and are in their 20s with between two years and two months experience.



we are the only two at risk. There was no criteria used or any sort of selection process and we have had two consultation meetings. HR did not even seem to know criteria had to be put in place!!



Our union is handling it. It's very stressful as we feel we would have little chance of getting another job in this field as there are few opportunities. I am a part time working mum.



We are waiting for the next move - this has been ongoing for two months.



What would our successes be at a tribunal and how much would be paid roughly? Thank you.

Takeaway_Addict

Buffycat wrote: »

myself and a colleague have been put at risk of redudancy. We feel we have been unfairly targeted because of our age. We are in our 40s and 50s and together we have almost 50 Years' professional experience. We are also two of the longest serving. We are two of around eight people doing the same job - many of whom are on freelance contracts and are in their 20s with between two years and two months experience.



we are the only two at risk. There was no criteria used or any sort of selection process and we have had two consultation meetings. HR did not even seem to know criteria had to be put in place!!



Our union is handling it. It's very stressful as we feel we would have little chance of getting another job in this field as there are few opportunities. I am a part time working mum.



We are waiting for the next move - this has been ongoing for two months.



What would our successes be at a tribunal and how much would be paid roughly? Thank you.

You're probably being targeted because based on the contracts you are employees and the others are not (as they're freelance).

If the union is on it leave it to them but keep chasing them. I would expect the best thing is to see if the other people are actually employees rather than on freelance.

Others will be here to advise.

Takeaway_Addict

and perhaps you'd be kind enough to come back and update the thread unlike last time...

Buffycat

Some of us are employees and some are freelance. The two of us work out of the office which is closing (although our jobs can be done anywhere!) The MD brazenly said he would be getting the others to cover our work! The crucial thing is we cover other people's work when they're off. We have 50 years of experience in this industry and my colleague has been there for 25 years! The other ones not selected have been there a matter of months.

Undervalued

Buffycat wrote: »

Some of us are employees and some are freelance. The two of us work out of the office which is closing (although our jobs can be done anywhere!) The MD brazenly said he would be getting the others to cover our work! The crucial thing is we cover other people's work when they're off. We have 50 years of experience in this industry and my colleague has been there for 25 years! The other ones not selected have been there a matter of months.

I understand your frustration but there are many factors in a decision about who to make redundant of which that is only one.

I am not saying the decision is lawful, it may or may not be. For example a decision to make staff redundant and outsource the work can be valid. It may also be that the newer staff have skill in some other areas and a business case can be made for keeping them. In any case, if they have only been employed for a matter of months, redundancy is irrelevant as they can be dismissed without compensation for any reason or none in the first two years.

Your "freelance" colleagues have no redundancy entitlement unless they can convince an employment tribunal that they are in fact employees.

sangie595

Having 50 years experience is not a mantra for avoiding redundancy. It could just as easily be the case that you are out of date, and younger employers are better suited to current conditions in your work. I'm not saying that is the case, simply that it is an alternative view that had as much validity as yours. And there is nothing "brazen" about saying that the work would be covered by other people - that is commonplace in any redundancy situation. So it really is best to discuss this with the union. That is their job and they know the circumstances better than anyone here. Although it does sound that it is your office and the jobs based there that are at risk, from what you describe, and that would very possibly mean that unless you are going to relocate, it is the people in that office who are most at risk.

You need to focus on the fact that there are going to be redundancies, and how you present a case that the employer is better keeping you, and how they can do that in a way that suits the employer. Saying that it shouldn't happen because you have been there forever simply isn't going to cut that argument. If they thought that, you wouldn't be at risk in the first place.

Buffycat

Thanks for the replies. I should add that my colleague and I are the ones who guide the younger staff in their work. Another person left after the redundancy issue had started yet no changes were forthcoming. We presented low cost work at home cases which the MD shot down and kept saying 'I've made up my mind.' We were also happy to relocate but he didn't even reply to that. There was a massive silence when the union asked for the criteria.

Buffycat

And during the consultation the MD name dropped a few people who'd passed through the company and gone on.

He seemed to suggest we should be moving on! Surely age discrimination?? HR has also not provided any minutes.

sangie595

In that case the matter needs to be monitored by the union. If you are willing to relocate to another office, and there are people doing the same job in those offices, then there should be a "fair" selection process. That said, it's funny how that process always comes up with the answer the employer wants it to come to. But focus on the flexibility you are offering, not on the fact that you've worked there a long time. That isn't a strong argument (although the cost of making you redundant might be!).