Redundancy Issue

emploee_77

Hi All,

I was recently informed that I would be made redundant and that my exit date is mid-July. By then, I will have 9 years and 11 months of service and will be receiving nine months of salary. One thing I noticed on my termination letter was that the company stated it was "with huge regret and that every effort had been made to find alternative employment." However, no effort was actually made. During the handover of my work, a new member was transferred into the team. Their old role was closed, and they were brought in to pick up the workload, including some of my tasks. During a team meeting, they were welcomed as we were "extremely shorthanded."

When I mentioned this situation to HR, they were shocked and did not initially believe it. After investigating, it was confirmed that my version of events was correct, and there had been an assumption within the team that I was leaving due to disciplinary issues. HR has since reverted and asked how they can help make amends.

I am completely at a loss as to what to say. Can anyone help?

Thank you.

 

Brie

I think every redundancy notice I've ever received had some variation on "every effort is being made to find alternative employment".  Some times there's been workshops on how to write a cv or what to expect in an interview but nothing much has been actively done regarding redeployment within the company.

But are you saying that you are the only one being made redundant and there has never been any disciplinary issues raised with you?  If they were acting on instructions of disciplinary offences of some sort you would have either been marched out of the building with the contents of your locker or whatever OR there would have been a series of meetings discussing the situation, 1st meeting, 2nd meeting, termination.  Any HR department should know these 2 scenarios so frankly I don't think this can be correct.  

So do HR now think you shouldn't be made redundant?  Have they confirmed that in writing??  If this is the situation I would expect HR and your manager make a public apology to you in front of the rest of the team at the very minimum.  If they are still proceeding with the redundancy I would start printing off all the evidence about their error(s) and advise them that once you are exited you will be taking them to an employment tribunal for unlawful dismissal.  

emploee_77

emploee_77 said:

Hi All,

I was recently informed that I would be made redundant and that my exit date is mid-July. By then, I will have 9 years and 11 months of service and will be receiving nine months of salary. One thing I noticed on my termination letter was that the company stated it was "with huge regret and that every effort had been made to find alternative employment." However, no effort was actually made. During the handover of my work, a new member was transferred into the team. Their old role was closed, and they were brought in to pick up the workload, including some of my tasks. During a team meeting, they were welcomed as we were "extremely shorthanded."

When I mentioned this situation to HR, they were shocked and did not initially believe it. After investigating, it was confirmed that my version of events was correct, and there had been an assumption within the team that I was leaving due to disciplinary issues. HR has since reverted and asked how they can help make amends.

I am completely at a loss as to what to say. Can anyone help?

Thank you.

 

No disciplinary issues of any nature.

The transfer into the team had their own role closed as a result of the restructuring and they were redeployed to my team where I am being laid off.

LinLui

I have read this exact same scenario in another post somewhere in the last few days. 

There isn't a clear story here,  but on the face of it,  just because your role is redundant didn't mean that the team may be shorthanded or that some of your tasks could not be given to a new member of the team.  I can see potentially hundreds of scenarios where the details could easily explain this as entirely lawful and reasonable. 

Based on what you have said here,  loads of relevant information is missing without which is impossible to suggest any worthwhile advice. 

I find it quite hard to believe that HR appear to be suggesting that they played no part in the redundancy processes. So a good explanation to start with would be how they can possibly not know what had been going on. 

LightFlare

emploee_77 said:

Hi All,

I was recently informed that I would be made redundant and that my exit date is mid-July. By then, I will have 9 years and 11 months of service and will be receiving nine months of salary. One thing I noticed on my termination letter was that the company stated it was "with huge regret and that every effort had been made to find alternative employment." However, no effort was actually made. During the handover of my work, a new member was transferred into the team. Their old role was closed, and they were brought in to pick up the workload, including some of my tasks. During a team meeting, they were welcomed as we were "extremely shorthanded."

When I mentioned this situation to HR, they were shocked and did not initially believe it. After investigating, it was confirmed that my version of events was correct, and there had been an assumption within the team that I was leaving due to disciplinary issues. HR has since reverted and asked how they can help make amends.

I am completely at a loss as to what to say. Can anyone help?

Thank you.

 

are you sure -- its usually 1 week per year

LinLui

LightFlare said:

emploee_77 said:

Hi All,

I was recently informed that I would be made redundant and that my exit date is mid-July. By then, I will have 9 years and 11 months of service and will be receiving nine months of salary. One thing I noticed on my termination letter was that the company stated it was "with huge regret and that every effort had been made to find alternative employment." However, no effort was actually made. During the handover of my work, a new member was transferred into the team. Their old role was closed, and they were brought in to pick up the workload, including some of my tasks. During a team meeting, they were welcomed as we were "extremely shorthanded."

When I mentioned this situation to HR, they were shocked and did not initially believe it. After investigating, it was confirmed that my version of events was correct, and there had been an assumption within the team that I was leaving due to disciplinary issues. HR has since reverted and asked how they can help make amends.

I am completely at a loss as to what to say. Can anyone help?

Thank you.

 

are you sure -- its usually 1 week per year

Statutory redundancy is not "1 week per year". It is 

• half a week’s pay for each full year you were under 22
• one week’s pay for each full year you were 22 or older, but under 41
• one and half week’s pay for each full year you were 41 or older

There is also a cap on statutory redundancy.

Many people have contractual redundancy and I assume that is the case for the OP since they have been told by their employer what their redundancy package is. Why do you think they don't know their own facts?

emploee_77

So I had a late Friday meeting. The company has said mistakes were made, the transfer in is doing tasks that I could have but we're now too far into the process. The company also said that the experience was unacceptably humiliating and cruel towards me.  My termination date has been extended to 31st December and my redundancy will be 12 months salary.

I didn't realise this could be done. I think it's a good deal, I assume I should accept?

LinLui

There is nothing in that to suggest, from what you say, that there isn't a genuine redundancy, more that it has been handled very badly. But the choices are that you either accept - there is no way that you would be likely to gain that much even if you went to a tribunal and won; or that you decide to fight the redunancy altogether - and if you did that, do you genuinely want to work there after this?

Personally I would take it provided it is all in writing and agreed. 

Myt two areas to question would be - what if you were offered your dream job next month (or before the end of the year)? What happens to your redudancy pay? Because technically, in law, you could lose it all if you obtain another job too soon.

And (although this is for you) what if they withdraw the redundancy - because they could, and there is nothing that you could do about it if they did. 

emploee_77

LinLui said:

There is nothing in that to suggest, from what you say, that there isn't a genuine redundancy, more that it has been handled very badly. But the choices are that you either accept - there is no way that you would be likely to gain that much even if you went to a tribunal and won; or that you decide to fight the redunancy altogether - and if you did that, do you genuinely want to work there after this?

Personally I would take it provided it is all in writing and agreed. 

Myt two areas to question would be - what if you were offered your dream job next month (or before the end of the year)? What happens to your redudancy pay? Because technically, in law, you could lose it all if you obtain another job too soon.

And (although this is for you) what if they withdraw the redundancy - because they could, and there is nothing that you could do about it if they did. 

The redundancies are genuine as the company is going through a restructuring. The issue is that I should have been afforded the opportunity of the role within my team ahead of the transfer.

Document will cite that I can apply termination earlier in the event of a job being found elsewhere and redundancy will be paid.

LinLui

emploee_77 said:

LinLui said:

There is nothing in that to suggest, from what you say, that there isn't a genuine redundancy, more that it has been handled very badly. But the choices are that you either accept - there is no way that you would be likely to gain that much even if you went to a tribunal and won; or that you decide to fight the redunancy altogether - and if you did that, do you genuinely want to work there after this?

Personally I would take it provided it is all in writing and agreed. 

Myt two areas to question would be - what if you were offered your dream job next month (or before the end of the year)? What happens to your redudancy pay? Because technically, in law, you could lose it all if you obtain another job too soon.

And (although this is for you) what if they withdraw the redundancy - because they could, and there is nothing that you could do about it if they did. 

The redundancies are genuine as the company is going through a restructuring. The issue is that I should have been afforded the opportunity of the role within my team ahead of the transfer.

Document will cite that I can apply termination earlier in the event of a job being found elsewhere and redundancy will be paid.

That is possibly true - but not necessarily. You haven't clearly identified a "role" that is the same as yours - tasks are something different. If the "new role" in the team is the same or similar grade and covers a range of tasks similar to your redundant role / tasks that you are capable of doing then you have an argument that the new role should have been appointed competitively. Your being in the team already doesn't trump the rights of someone else whose role is also being made redundant. If the "new role" doesn't fit those parameters,  it's a bit more of a grey area.  

I agree that it's been handled poorly, but that isn't the same thing as handled "wrongly". And even if handled "wrongly" it seems that the offer you've got is pretty much beyond anything you could conceivably win in a court,  sometime in the future,  if you win. So unless there is some huge "hole" in the information you've given - like having some dynamite slam dunk claim that you can't possibly lose - I'd still suggest that you quit whilst you are ahead (assuming it's all confirmed in writing).

For some reason or another, someone somewhere decided that your role / you were being made redundant and someone else wasn't. You may never understand what the reasons for that were. But it was a decision made by someone,  and all those someone's appear to be trying to offload that fact onto someone else! As I said before,  I don't believe for one minute that any of this happened without HRs knowledge. Conspiracy or screw up - does it really matter? Do you actually want to continue working for these people? Without a sweet deal you wouldn't have a choice. You have a sweet deal. Take it. 

emploee_77

LinLui said:

emploee_77 said:

LinLui said:

There is nothing in that to suggest, from what you say, that there isn't a genuine redundancy, more that it has been handled very badly. But the choices are that you either accept - there is no way that you would be likely to gain that much even if you went to a tribunal and won; or that you decide to fight the redunancy altogether - and if you did that, do you genuinely want to work there after this?

Personally I would take it provided it is all in writing and agreed. 

Myt two areas to question would be - what if you were offered your dream job next month (or before the end of the year)? What happens to your redudancy pay? Because technically, in law, you could lose it all if you obtain another job too soon.

And (although this is for you) what if they withdraw the redundancy - because they could, and there is nothing that you could do about it if they did. 

The redundancies are genuine as the company is going through a restructuring. The issue is that I should have been afforded the opportunity of the role within my team ahead of the transfer.

Document will cite that I can apply termination earlier in the event of a job being found elsewhere and redundancy will be paid.

That is possibly true - but not necessarily. You haven't clearly identified a "role" that is the same as yours - tasks are something different. If the "new role" in the team is the same or similar grade and covers a range of tasks similar to your redundant role / tasks that you are capable of doing then you have an argument that the new role should have been appointed competitively. Your being in the team already doesn't trump the rights of someone else whose role is also being made redundant. If the "new role" doesn't fit those parameters,  it's a bit more of a grey area.  

I agree that it's been handled poorly, but that isn't the same thing as handled "wrongly". And even if handled "wrongly" it seems that the offer you've got is pretty much beyond anything you could conceivably win in a court,  sometime in the future,  if you win. So unless there is some huge "hole" in the information you've given - like having some dynamite slam dunk claim that you can't possibly lose - I'd still suggest that you quit whilst you are ahead (assuming it's all confirmed in writing).

For some reason or another, someone somewhere decided that your role / you were being made redundant and someone else wasn't. You may never understand what the reasons for that were. But it was a decision made by someone,  and all those someone's appear to be trying to offload that fact onto someone else! As I said before,  I don't believe for one minute that any of this happened without HRs knowledge. Conspiracy or screw up - does it really matter? Do you actually want to continue working for these people? Without a sweet deal you wouldn't have a choice. You have a sweet deal. Take it. 

It was literally a case of my jobs going to the transfer at the same time as the team was advised that we were shorthanded. It appears that the management of the process was deemed poor.

I have applied for a number of internal roles but then if they come to nothing I'm out.