redundancy fallout

nicechap

chadlebowski wrote: »

UPDATE:
I have now been asked by Trustees if I would consider any reduction in my hours. I have time to consider it, and I have confirmed that I would consider it.

I asked if it would be a pro-rata reduction in salary, and that, as the reduction in workload is not my asking, if I could ask for a relative increase in wage, i.e. work 3 days, get paid for 4.

The other option is to ask for redundancy, with the payout, and then be re-hired in a new role, on a part-time basis.

And I would like to ask for a ex gratia payment, as I know that my role is valuable. And that I can turn down their request, and that my terms would still be my current salary and 40hrs/week.

Has anyone any experience with a similar situation? Any advice? I do have confirmation now too that insolvency is still technically applicable and that as soon as liabilities have been cleared, the Foundation will cease to operate.

Sangie's advice remains valid. Get out and tell the charity commissioners.

For informational purposes Cardinal Richelieu died in 1642.

stator

Why are you still there?
Are you waiting for a redundancy payout?
If so, just keep your head down. Do whatever work you can. If they don't give you enough work, then just twiddle your thumbs. Get a radio in the offfice and enjoy a light work load.

Les79

What charity is it?

sangie595

Genuineguy03 wrote: »

The duties simply pass to the new position. Its the position (job) that's made redundant not the person, or the duties under the redundant position. So yes they can make the position redundant and remploy the person in the new position with same or similar duties..

They could also go straight to an employment tribunal, not pass go and not collect $200. To do as you suggest would be very dangerous, as it could (a) create continuity of employment anyway and (b) be interpreted as a deliberate attempt to break continuity and circumvent employment rights. Not something that I'd recommend an employer do, or an employee agree to. But that's just because I'd know not to recommend it in the first place.

elsien

Les79 wrote: »

What charity is it?

They'd be very silly to answer that on an open Internet forum.

Genuineguy03

Sangie

Where's your proof that what I said was wrong. Or is that just your unqualified personal opinion/interpretation at play again?

Continuous employment has no bearing, if they paid redundancy and reimployed. As payment of redundancy to employee breaks their continuous employment (section 214, employment rights act 1996). And the employee won't be eligible for future redundancy payment till they have accured another 2 years service. After said 2 years their redundancy pay will be calculated based on the full period of latter period of employment.

Les79

elsien wrote: »

They'd be very silly to answer that on an open Internet forum.

Haha, I know. Mind you, OP's username is a "very silly" thing to have "on an open Internet forum" so I was 50-50 that they'd be silly enough to post the charity name too.


To be fair, though, I only ask because it would be interesting to see whether the charity is accepting public donations etc and whether it would be of public interest to know that the charity was insolvent and winding up next year. I wouldn't want to support said charity.... Sadly, OP's FB profile doesn't reveal the answer.