Redundancy why?

Splog

Splog

Suspended / Banned
Messages
6,257
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
No
The company I work for is making 10% of its UK staff redundant that's only 11 people and it's being done through a points system based on skills, output, quality, availabilty, flexibility etc. The problem is that I have done the rating for everyone :shake: as has my boss., in general the points are similar but he has a dislike for some people and has tried to fiddle the numbers for a few people :suspect: and asked me to change my points to suit his (I totally refused to do this)

A suggestion to anyone finding themselves in a redundancy situation please make sure you find out why! and keep copies of any assessment and challenge it if you're dubious about the reasons and don't agree with the decision if you feel it's unfair :thinking:

Must be the worst job I have ever had to do :( can't wait to win the lottery)
 
That's pretty messed up dude. Makes it harder to tell someone because the company is so small. Just keep your head down and do what is right.
 
yeah, ours was done that way - and to be honest i think it was rigged
 
KayJay said:
That's pretty messed up dude. Makes it harder to tell someone because the company is so small. Just keep your head down and do what is right.
Click to expand...

Thanks mate :) I hate it , It changes peoples lives, people I know , people I like.
 
Simple option....give your boss a rating of 1 point and wave goodbye as he gets his marching orders:thumbs:
 
i cant even get a job :S. and splog are you cobras clone?
 
Splog said:
The company I work for is making 10% of its UK staff redundant that's only 11 people and it's being done through a points system based on skills, output, quality, availabilty, flexibility etc. The problem is that I have done the rating for everyone :shake: as has my boss., in general the points are similar but he has a dislike for some people and has tried to fiddle the numbers for a few people :suspect: and asked me to change my points to suit his (I totally refused to do this)
Click to expand...

That's an ET waiting to happen. Some of the criteria are also iffy. Availabilty could be classed as sex discrimination for example.

Does the company provide selection criteria for redundancy as part of the contract?

My last full time employer had a round of redundancies using similar criteria, they also made some other basic mistakes. They ended up with a dozen or more Tribunal's on their hands and had to settle all of them. After all the pay outs the company only lasted another 6 months.

If you're worried, might be worth picking up a copy of this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Employment-Law-Deborah-J-Lockton/dp/140398543X

and checking if you're in the clear. If you have any doubts get an employment solicitor to confirm everything, it could save a fortune.
 
I'm with PXL8, employment law is such a rcky area you have to be really familiar with it in instances like this (apologies if you're the HR director or something). Definately make sure you've checked the system out before giving anyone the good news.
 
It changes peoples lives, people I know , people I like.

sometimes for the better though, don't think its a bad thing for everyone
 
I forget the exact number but if a group of people are to be made redundant its classed as a group redundancy and there are some pretty strict rules that must be followed - like a member of staff becomes a spokesperson for those whose jobs are under threat, elected by those under threat. The employer also has quite a few other obligations, if they don't follow them you can go for unfair dismissal.
Was in this situation a few years ago after my company got taken over, I did nothing about the company not following the rules but really should of. Illegitimi non carborundum!
 
Craft said:
I forget the exact number but if a group of people are to be made redundant its classed as a group redundancy and there are some pretty strict rules that must be followed - like a member of staff becomes a spokesperson for those whose jobs are under threat, elected by those under threat. The employer also has quite a few other obligations, if they don't follow them you can go for unfair dismissal.
Was in this situation a few years ago after my company got taken over, I did nothing about the company not following the rules but really should of. Illegitimi non carborundum!
Click to expand...

Consultation is the main issue here but with less than 20 employees affected it just has to be "in good time" but presumably as selection has started the staff have already been informed?
 
Splog said:
he has a dislike for some people and has tried to fiddle the numbers for a few people :suspect: and asked me to change my points to suit his (I totally refused to do this)
Click to expand...

I'd be careful, otherwise you might find your own score mysteriously dropping :suspect::naughty:
 
fabs said:
Indeed. Something that led to my own downfall, my forum posts being spied on.
Click to expand...

:eek: oh my...posts on here?! spied on by your bosses?!!
 
ohhh i see. gosh. big brother is watching us........maybe i should get off here! :p
 
Splog said:
The company I work for is making 10% of its UK staff redundant that's only 11 people and it's being done through a points system based on skills, output, quality, availabilty, flexibility etc.
)
Click to expand...



Not good

But then again I’ve been made redundant twice in six months!

Made redundant last march by the company I had worked at for over 20 years
Managed to find a job only for that company to go down 6 months later.
Now been out of work since October, but getting a few interviews but I’m on the wrong side of 50 which I don’t think helps.:|
 
I'm being made redundant this year, all they can tell us at the moment is it will be between April and June, how helpful is that!

There is no financial reason for them to do this, just want all the finance teams from across the uk in the same place, now they can't think much of us if there are putting us all out of work the way things are going on at the moment
 
a lot of companies are making use of the current economic climate to ditch people under the guise of redundancies as the employment laws dont let them just get rid.
 
gillybean103 said:
There is no financial reason for them to do this, just want all the finance teams from across the uk in the same place, now they can't think much of us if there are putting us all out of work the way things are going on at the moment
Click to expand...

Were you given the choice to relocate?
 
Well we can relocate, BUT everyone who has said they would like to, has to re-apply for their jobs and no-one is getting them. I can't relocate, it's impossible to move from Norfolk to Manchester, everything is more expensive up there and they don't seem to get it. We were told to come up with resonable alternatives where they could relocate to somewhere nearby so we can keep our jobs but they have ignored them all, they will do it no matter what we say, who are we to argue
 
It might be worth looking into this a bit more, there are a few points to consider.

If the company is moving all the finance workers to a single location then "suitable alternative employment" would be the same job at the new location. That's a specific job for a specific person, not a list of positions available that can be applied for.

There could also be an unfair unit of selection. If the work is interchangeable between groups of workers then the broader unit of selection should be adopted - in other words all finance employees at ALL locations should be considered for redundancy.

If the company is actually keeping the same number of finance employees but just moving to or employing them at a new location then the redundancy isn't a real one. The mobility clause in your contract might be revealing here - if you don't have one or it's limited then the redundancy route is the easy get out for the employer.

Of course if you weren't able to accept the alternative employment anyway it would limit any claim, but if the selection is flawed or the redundancy isn't real then there could still be a case to answer.
 
HanC said:
ohhh i see. gosh. big brother is watching us........maybe i should get off here! :p
Click to expand...


who did you think it was up the tree with the binoculars looking in your bedroom window every night lmao
 
pxl8 said:
It might be worth looking into this a bit more, there are a few points to consider.

If the company is moving all the finance workers to a single location then "suitable alternative employment" would be the same job at the new location. That's a specific job for a specific person, not a list of positions available that can be applied for.

There could also be an unfair unit of selection. If the work is interchangeable between groups of workers then the broader unit of selection should be adopted - in other words all finance employees at ALL locations should be considered for redundancy.

If the company is actually keeping the same number of finance employees but just moving to or employing them at a new location then the redundancy isn't a real one. The mobility clause in your contract might be revealing here - if you don't have one or it's limited then the redundancy route is the easy get out for the employer.

Of course if you weren't able to accept the alternative employment anyway it would limit any claim, but if the selection is flawed or the redundancy isn't real then there could still be a case to answer.
Click to expand...

That's really interesting, sounds like you have experience of this. So what do you suggest we do?
 
Without knowing the situation in greater detail it's impossible to advise really. Are you in a union, if so that would be a good place to start.

Other than that a trip to the library or pick up a copy of the book I linked to above, have a good read about how redundancy *should* work and compare it to your situation.

One place to start is to look at your contract and what the company has officially said about the proposed redundancies, is there a genuine reason for it? Unfortunately it's all too common for HR and/or management to make assumptions about the process that make it unfair.

I was made redundant 3 times in 3 years, the last time the company said they were removing one type of job from the site I worked at. The site was staying open and the work was interchangeable, selection was based on location and the opinion of one person rather than last in, first out or criteria such as skill, experience, attendance, etc.

They didn't consult, inform us of selection, etc. a manager from the head office just turned up one day with a letter telling us we were selected for potential redundancy and put on gardening leave to await a decision. The only people they did this to were the ones who were made redundant, not everyone who did the same job. In effect we'd been pre-selected and they made a token effort to go through the motions. We went to appeal, and then finally applied for an Employment Tribunal. Throughout the company thought we were bluffing and it was only a few days before the hearing date that they finally took legal advice which was to settle asap as they were going to lose. Originally, at the appeal stage, we'd only asked for an extra months wages, we ended up with several months worth ;)

There are lots of little things the employer did wrong but any redundancy process needs to stick to the rules or it runs the risk of being judged unfair.
 
Sounds like PXL8 has this all sewn up.

From a personal view the only advice i would give is, don't roll over, do some research, ask those in the know, and fight. Also make sure that the 'potential for redundency' does not affect your health, that is more precious than a job any day.
 
Gilly, you wouldn't happen to be at a foodstuffs company would you? I know someone who this is happening to as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top