Change of working location

EnPointe

There are  no redundant roles, as the  work appears from  what the OP states  to be moving to  the other site and all the staff  moving with it ...  therefore there is no redundancy 

Is it a reasonable plan for  peopel to  travel to the new Site , many  employers would argue and i think  the courts  would agree that  Nottingham to Derby  is a reasonable commute 

the next question is  -is there any  reason by  virtue of a EA2010 Protected Characteristic ( primarily Disability) why the OP's Brother  cannot  learn to drive a car  / ride a motorcycle ...  if the answer to that is no then unfortunately   by  refusing to move with the  company to the new site he  is effectively resigning.  

Mobility clause is a red herring here , mobility clauses are  more usual aobut  short term  moves to  fulfill the needs of the needs  i.e. they  need a forkie/ trainer / fire marshal / first aid at Site B  for a few  days / weeks   so they ask  someone from Site A where they have sufficient to spare one ... 

EnPointe

theoretica said:

Seems like he wants to investigate constructive dismissal and whether he thinks it worth bringing a claim as the new site is unreasonable for him.

There is no Redudnancy as the job still exists at the new / other site , which is arguably within a reasonable commuting distance 

I really think in the absence of a Protected Characteristic which has direct impact on getting to the other site ( i.e. DIsability meaning  that  someone cannot drive )    that the chances of a  COnstructive dismissal or  claim that this  is a redundancy situation  would  be very hard to sustain 

EnPointe

thebrexitunicorn said:

If he is still with the employer at the time his depot closes this could well be a redundancy situation.  His old role will no longer exist and for the reasons given,  the alternative (new location) is not suitable.  

In his position I would be looking for alternative employment now.  However, if I hadn’t found anything by the time of the move I would be pursuing a redundancy payment.

there is no redundancy ,  as  it's likely   that  any court would consider the  move to  be a reasonable distance , it's not like they are moving  to a site in Manchester  or Durham  or Stevenage ... 

EnPointe

magpies79 said:

thebrexitunicorn said:

Savvy_Sue said:

thebrexitunicorn said:

If he is still with the employer at the time his depot closes this could well be a redundancy situation.  His old role will no longer exist and for the reasons given,  the alternative (new location) is not suitable.  

In his position I would be looking for alternative employment now.  However, if I hadn’t found anything by the time of the move I would be pursuing a redundancy payment.

I don't see redundancy here. The job still exists. The new location is not unreasonably far away. Childcare and travel arrangements are not the employer's concern. 

Is there any wraparound care at the school / nursery?

But I'd be looking for another job.

What is reasonable will vary depending on individual circumstances.  

 If the contract specifies the current location as the only place of work then childcare and transport can certainly be relevant if they are the reasons that the new location isn’t suitable for the employee.  

The role is not only the tasks it’s also the location (and hours of work), assuming the information about the contract is correct.  

A chat with an employment law solicitor, with all the information put to them, might be a good investment.  

Well this was what the lady was saying on the phone from what he told me on the phone.

 he works along side 5 other people who all do the same duties 3 have contacts that state can be requested to work at any other depot within 1.5 hrs travelling distance.

my brother and one other person contacts states Nottingham only and both have worked there around 14 years the other 3 people varies between 3-6 years they have worked for the company.

I think you   are at a cross purpose  as to what the mobility clause  is there for.   It's absence  doesn't protect  someone from  being moved if the Operating  conditions of the company  are such that they move the sites ...   

 those who have the clause  could be told  any way  , regardless  of the site closure -  "  the business needs you to got and work at  the other site for the next  2 weeks  "  ...  

a job i've had  had a base sit, i could be sent to any  other site within 25 miles as a routine part of  my duties and could be asked to travel to sites that were  further away  ...