Company closing site....urgent advice needed please

Tammykitty

We had a similar issue, a move of about 20 miles to a different site, now, as i was already travelling 20 miles to work, and the new location was about 30+ from home, and these were semi-rural Northern Ireland roads, so the new commute would take over an hour, and the roads weren't great for travelling, especially in winter.
Unfortunately, our contracts did have a mobility clause, so we had no real choice, although i was offered a different job in my location but I loved my job so i went, regretted it quickly though, and finished up leaving the company a few months later.

I believe you are entitled to redundancy as long as your contract doesn't have a mobility clause, and your reasons for moving are valid, ask the union, or if you don't have one, join one now for future issues anyway,

vacheron

OP. Does your contract mention anything about re-location? Sometimes there are clauses in there which may be specific or vague (I have seen both). 

When our company changed site locations they were flexible with the working hours as it involved more travel for the majority of the workforce. but then we were moving "as one" and not attempting to integrate into another sites working patterns.  

Manxman_in_exile

I had a similar battle almost 20 years ago, but the commute to work was changing from about 5 miles to 90+ miles.  This was in the NHS and management was adamant that the additional commute was reasonable, but once I stuck my heels in and showed I wasn't moving they didn't put up much of a fight and accepted I was in a redundancy situation.  There were half a dozen colleagues in the same situation and they all accepted the move after being given promises about working from home (when it was not commonly done) etc.  They all regretted the move - and broken promises.

I'm not sure a 15 mile commute would be unreasonable in the circumstances.  What does your union say?

crowman99uk

Thankyou for all your comments.

Final update on all that happened and the outcome.

I was served with a letter giving me 5 weeks notice of termination of contract due to redundancy (but apparently that is just another word for dismissal, and as an offer of suitable alternative employment was made, I was not entitled to redundancy payment).
The union ended up being as useful as a chocolate teapot. Firstly saying I had a strong case for taking them to tribunal for non payment of redundancy pay, which they were willing to pursue on my behalf,  and then emailing me to say mine was a complicated and difficult case, and also no indication of whether they were going to pursue it or not. My follow up email to ask what they were planning on doing remains unanswered - over a month ago! I haven't bothered chasing it as it is irrelevant now.

Anyway, I contacted ACAS for advice, and after 3 or 4 calls got through to an extremely helpful and well informed adviser. I was actually enquiring about "early conciliation" but their website is a little confusing (it was to me) and thought early conciliation was using ACAS as a middle person to sort out any problems before I left the company...but it doesn't work like that. You can only go via ACAS once your contract is terminated, then firstly early conciliation and afterwards if needed application to tribunal.

So, I worked my 5 week notice and on my very last day was called into the office as soon as I got into work, and was handed a letter stating that the company were going to pay me statutory redundancy as they agreed it was unreasonable for me to travel as I do not have my own vehicle.

What they were hoping (and has happened to quite a few of my colleagues) is by saying there would be no redundancy payouts is that staff would either transfer to the new site (which many didn't want to do, consequently they are about 75% understaffed as they thought everyone would want to go!), or, as in the majority of cases, if they didn't transfer they would find other jobs and leave the company of their own volition before their termination date was issued or expired, so that they would not have to pay redundancy to them.

As for my situation, I am fortunate enough to be employed in a sector that is constantly recruiting and subsequently had a new job to start (in the same town that I live and worked) the week following my termination date.

Again, many thanks for taking the time to read and reply.

vacheron

crowman99uk said:

Thankyou for all your comments.

Final update on all that happened and the outcome.

I was served with a letter giving me 5 weeks notice of termination of contract due to redundancy (but apparently that is just another word for dismissal, and as an offer of suitable alternative employment was made, I was not entitled to redundancy payment).
The union ended up being as useful as a chocolate teapot. Firstly saying I had a strong case for taking them to tribunal for non payment of redundancy pay, which they were willing to pursue on my behalf,  and then emailing me to say mine was a complicated and difficult case, and also no indication of whether they were going to pursue it or not. My follow up email to ask what they were planning on doing remains unanswered - over a month ago! I haven't bothered chasing it as it is irrelevant now.

Anyway, I contacted ACAS for advice, and after 3 or 4 calls got through to an extremely helpful and well informed adviser. I was actually enquiring about "early conciliation" but their website is a little confusing (it was to me) and thought early conciliation was using ACAS as a middle person to sort out any problems before I left the company...but it doesn't work like that. You can only go via ACAS once your contract is terminated, then firstly early conciliation and afterwards if needed application to tribunal.

So, I worked my 5 week notice and on my very last day was called into the office as soon as I got into work, and was handed a letter stating that the company were going to pay me statutory redundancy as they agreed it was unreasonable for me to travel as I do not have my own vehicle.

What they were hoping (and has happened to quite a few of my colleagues) is by saying there would be no redundancy payouts is that staff would either transfer to the new site (which many didn't want to do, consequently they are about 75% understaffed as they thought everyone would want to go!), or, as in the majority of cases, if they didn't transfer they would find other jobs and leave the company of their own volition before their termination date was issued or expired, so that they would not have to pay redundancy to them.

As for my situation, I am fortunate enough to be employed in a sector that is constantly recruiting and subsequently had a new job to start (in the same town that I live and worked) the week following my termination date.

Again, many thanks for taking the time to read and reply.

Thanks for updating us on the situation OP, it is extremely courteous, though often rare on these forums.

To be honest, most companies would prefer for all staff to leave of their own accord as it will save the employer some money. This happens anyway in most mass redundancies as people "jump ship" abandoning their redundancy in favor of grabbing the best current vacancies before their colleagues.

But for your employer to state categorically that there would be no redundancy offered in this situation is extremely naïve of them, and bordering on stupid if this was said categorically in writing, and / or minuted.

Glad you got what you were entitled to out of the situation though, and good luck for the future.