Made Redundant but Contractors Kept On
Comments
-
How many are affected?
DarrenXbigman's guide to a happy life.
Eat properly
Sleep properly
Save some money0 -
Presumably the Settlement Agreement is more than redundancy would be otherwise. Does it include anything about a good reference?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."0 -
How many are affected?
Darren
She’s not sure - the briefing/minutes of the meeting refer to a team of support engineers.
Within her team, herself and another (the other has been on/is still on long term sick for over a year following a serious car accident) - the rest of her direct team are contractors.
From the sounds of it, potentially more than the trigger for consultation.0 -
Ok. Unfortunately I am not seeing much wrong here. They are making the role redundant- the work may continue but that will be reallocated, and they can do that. It is very common, when financial pressures are the driver, to retain contractors. They are usually cheaper overall and have no employment rights so they can be disposed of quickly.
On that basis there wouldn't be an alternative employment, and you can't discuss something that doesn't exist. And the "consultation" would cover the discussions on the settlement agreement.
I would suggest that fighting this on a technicality - if you can find one - isn't worth it. I would be looking at the best possible settlement offer and agreed reference. She will be getting legal advice anyway, so if there is something glaring that isn't obvious here, then they should pick it up. But the reality is that they don't want her, so why would she want to fight to stay? So unless there is something not obvious here, it probably isn't worth much anyway. If they are this close to the edge, getting out now might be best for her in the long run.0 -
Presumably the Settlement Agreement is more than redundancy would be otherwise. Does it include anything about a good reference?
Yes - I think statutory she is only entitled to 2 weeks pay (is it 1week per year???)
The words in the briefing from the meeting she had are “the financial benefit to you is due to the fact your settlement would include: a compensation payment equivalent to your redundancy entitlement and a payment for contractual elements”
A reference is included but it’s just a standard with job title and employment dates0 -
Ok. Unfortunately I am not seeing much wrong here. They are making the role redundant- the work may continue but that will be reallocated, and they can do that. It is very common, when financial pressures are the driver, to retain contractors. They are usually cheaper overall and have no employment rights so they can be disposed of quickly.
On that basis there wouldn't be an alternative employment, and you can't discuss something that doesn't exist. And the "consultation" would cover the discussions on the settlement agreement.
I would suggest that fighting this on a technicality - if you can find one - isn't worth it. I would be looking at the best possible settlement offer and agreed reference. She will be getting legal advice anyway, so if there is something glaring that isn't obvious here, then they should pick it up. But the reality is that they don't want her, so why would she want to fight to stay? So unless there is something not obvious here, it probably isn't worth much anyway. If they are this close to the edge, getting out now might be best for her in the long run.
Thanks very much, it just seems so out of the blue, totally understand it happens and she’s accepted that she’s leaving it’s more about getting the best pay off.
One question that I thought if was that if she didn’t accept the settlement agreement she’s technically at risk but I suppose that W made her mind up and she’d end up leaving at some point with only statutory redundancy pay?0 -
Yes that would be correct. She can fight, but that means she gets nothing more than statutory. And unless she has some good grounds she could end up with less.Thanks very much, it just seems so out of the blue, totally understand it happens and she’s accepted that she’s leaving it’s more about getting the best pay off.
One question that I thought if was that if she didn’t accept the settlement agreement she’s technically at risk but I suppose that W made her mind up and she’d end up leaving at some point with only statutory redundancy pay?0 -
We aren't being given the whole story!!Eat vegetables and fear no creditors, rather than eat duck and hide.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards