Redundancy on a secondment

Diluted wrote: »

Hi there,
New to this forum but would very much appreciate any advice!

Currently on a secondment which is to be made redundant very soon. My secondment was due to finish in September however, my original contract is supposed to run until Feb 2019 which it looks like the business have forgotten all about (long story but they believe they can simply let me go at the end of my current role which was a secondment initially that was just extended another 6 months).

If I do indeed receive the redundancy notice, am I entitled to then ask for the full payment of my first contract until February? There's no mention that the secondment supersedes the original contract and I don't think that's how secondments work generally in any case - looking forward to your expert advice.

Thanks all!

sangie595 wrote: »

Why? If they've worked there for more than two years, all they have a claim to is a small amount of redundancy pay. - but their substantive role isn't being made redundant? Unless ive missed something obvious?

Unless the original contract had no provision for notice, which would be exceptional, then no, there is no right to be paid until February next year! If you have less than two years total service, all the employer needs to do is serve notice. If you have a total of more than two years service, then the employer needs to follow a legally fair redundancy process, at the end of which you can be made redundant if there is no suitable alternative.

There is absolutely no benefit to you in keeping secrets - they won't owe you payment to February, unless that original contract didn't have a notice clause. And there still isn't any benefit if that were the case - you can't just claim the money without talking to them about it first! The law doesn't work in the way you think. There isn't a notice period for the secondment AND a notice period for your original fixed term contract. There's only a notice period for your employment.

So their belief is correct, and they can simply serve you notice from your employment, unless you have two years service, in which case they must operate a redundancy process before dismissing you.

sangie595 wrote: »

Not if it isn't there they wouldn't! And they can't establish whether it's there without asking the employer. It wouldn't constitute a significant claim or reason for voluntary redundancy. Secondment doesn't exist in law. It's not a concept that you'll find anywhere in legislation. It's an employers thing - a phrase they use to explain something. Everyone thinks they know what it means, but it doesn't! In law, "secondment" only exists to protect an employees rights when they are "loaned" to another organisation - it basically covers things like continuous employment. It doesn't protect the right to return to a substantive post unless there is an agreement to this effect made.

Within a single employer, i.e where the employer remains the same, it may constitute a temporary variation of contract, but there would be no legal right to return to the original contract per se - these things should be discussed in advance preferably, but if they aren't, it needs to be discussed now. Basically, assuming (and on the information provided here, assumptions might be dangerous) that this was a temporary variation of contract, and assuming that there is a role to go back to, then yes, there may be a right to return to the original role (although almost certainly not a right to be paid until February but not have to work until then!). But if there is no role to go back to, then redundancy applies.

It is a very long time since employers made the error of failing to incorporate notice periods into fixed term contracts - I believe I am correct in saying that I haven't seen a case since the late 80's.

Of course, if the OP has less than two years service, of course, it's all moot.