I was redundant then I wasen't

123457»

Comments

  • renegadefm wrote: »
    So basically my union rep is lying? You cant blame me for not knowing what to believe and be dismayed by all this.

    So could this simply mean individual companies have different rules when it comes to redundancy procedures? Clutching at straws when I say that, because I seem to remember when we had union meetings in the past that when redundancies are happening they ring fence certain areas so they cant be affected. So in essence you end up with non affected areas and affected areas, that's all I know, so it basically means employees in non affected areas cant be made redundant. So really I have been wrong to think they done something wrong based on what I always been led to believe.
    I'm going to take that as possibly a genuine break though for you. I'm not being patronising, but it's the first time you stopped and asked a question. Yes, what you believed is wrong. Some pages back, I can't recall who said it, but someone mentioned "bumping". Legally they're is no such thing as a "non-affected area". The law says that an employer should not make someone redundant unless they have absolutely no other choice. It also says that people should be offered suitable alternative employment if it is available. So,- and stop, think, and breath! - you said you didn't want to be made redundant, and someone else cheaper volunteered to go, and that left a job for you because you said you didn't want to go. Now if you want to buy a car, and you have two, exactly the same age, same condition, same color, but one is £27k cheaper - which will you pick? That's all the employer did - they had two cars, exactly the same, one cheaper, and the other more expensive car wanted to stay where it was. And yes, that a ridiculous comparison now I look at it, but you see what I mean. Nobody pays more than they have to.

    I'm honestly not sure either that the union advised you badly. Redundancy, as I think you've discovered, is complicated. Obviously I don't have any details other than what you've said here. But most people don't want to be made redundant. And most people who do and who are in a union, tell the union! The unions primary role is to fight for your job, and to fight tooth and nail for you to keep your job. What is the point of a trades union that doesn't fight for people's jobs, and if they can't win that fight, fight for the best possible deal? There's utterly no point at all in a union saying "yeah, ok make everyone redundant, we won't fight back". If you have a union like that you should leave it and get a better one! I'm seriously not blaming you, and I do get it - but you didn't tell them you wanted to take the money and go.

    In hindsight, they are in an impossible situation. They told you and your colleagues to fight. That is the right advice, even if it's a slam dunk. It's the way to maximise redundancy pay! They work for everyone. But if you'd told them you'd want to go, I am fairly sure they'd have advised you differently. You as opposed to everyone. Do you see the difference? You told them got didn't want a job after it was too late for them to help you. It isn't anyone's fault, but you should have told them about the new job and I know they'd have told you about counter notice - it's a well known fact and even lay reps know all about it. It's not like it needs a union lawyer. Now it isn't your fault you didn't tell them. It isn't their fault either.

    Think about it. The true tragedy here is that your employer probably thought that they felt awful making someone with your service redundant. I think that not just because it saved them money, but because actually, most employers do hate making people redundant. Especially long-serving employees. Someone else who was made redundant probably wanted that alternative job. They didn't get the chance. Hindsight... Wonderful thing!

    I do understand why you are aggrieved. But bear in mind what I said. The alternative world that you have mapped out quite possibly- even probably- wouldn't have happened. You don't know it would have worked out.

    Now here's me suggesting something radical. You can't turn back the clock. What was, is. But it seems that what is a huge trigger here are your current circumstances. We've lost those somewhere in the wall of bitterness. Ditch this thread. Hop over to Employment. Let's start again with a new thread on a new board. Let's talk about what your problems are now. I can't promise we can fix them. But we might be able to help you fix them or help you ask the union the right questions for now!
  • renegadefm
    renegadefm Posts: 1,303
    First Post Name Dropper Photogenic First Anniversary
    Forumite
    I honestly think I was badly informed by the union then, because they told me someone from a non affected area isnt even allowed to apply for voluntary redundancy. But you say there isnt such a think as a non affected area.

    If this is the case the union are at fault and I will be contacting them asap because either way someone is at fault because I was told the only way he got redundancy is because he was best buddies with one of the senior managers.
  • nicechap
    nicechap Posts: 2,852
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Forumite
    Blatchford wrote: »
    ......
    Move on. Or get help.

    OP, this is the absolute best advice you can get. Please take it.
    Originally Posted by shortcrust
    "Contact the Ministry of Fairness....If sufficient evidence of unfairness is discovered you’ll get an apology, a permanent contract with backdated benefits, a ‘Let’s Make it Fair!’ tshirt and mug, and those guilty of unfairness will be sent on a Fairness Awareness course."
  • renegadefm
    renegadefm Posts: 1,303
    First Post Name Dropper Photogenic First Anniversary
    Forumite
    nicechap I will just move on as its 5 years too late to complain.

    And I appreciate everyones help. But I honestly think now that the union missinformed me on certain things. Making me think these non affected areas wont be allowed to apply for voluntary redundancy for a start seems all wrong.

    They told us the company does this called ring fencing to protect non affected areas from redundancy, which if you think about it isnt fair anyway because you can have someone with a high sickness record remain employed simply because they are working in a ring fenced area.
  • renegadefm wrote: »
    I honestly think I was badly informed by the union then, because they told me someone from a non affected area isnt even allowed to apply for voluntary redundancy. But you say there isnt such a think as a non affected area.

    If this is the case the union are at fault and I will be contacting them asap because either way someone is at fault because I was told the only way he got redundancy is because he was best buddies with one of the senior managers.
    OK. It was hopeful but obviously not enough.

    I honestly think that nobody answering this thread now is actually helping the OP. A lot of people have tried. But they can't or won't see anything other than finding someone to blame.

    I can't tell people what to do, but please consider whether anything you might now have to say is actually helping the OP. It may be best just to let this thread die.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards