Redundancy

nicolee2931 · 28th October 2008, 19:48

My husband has recently been made redundant this week due to a downturn in work so his employer says, however while working out his notice period which he has 3 weeks remaining he has found out today that his employer has started recruiting trainees into the business a total of 4 trainees have been employed. Now my main question is, is his employer allowed to do this as if there is no work around then there in no work for trainees either. Something seems very wrong in this somewhere and just seems like an exploitation of cheap labour at the expense of experienced staff.

qbal · 28th October 2008, 21:33

Are the trainees that are being taken on going to do the same job as he has been doing? If he has been made redundant so that the employer can take on younger, cheaper labour then it is unfair dismissal on the grounds of discrimination. The employer cannot do this, and you should speak to someone at your local CAB regarding the issue, and taking the employer to an Employment Tribunal.

nicolee2931 · 28th October 2008, 23:15

Everybody works in the same dept. although there are sub departments but it is classed as the same job and the same type of work. This isn`t the only factor of this redundancy he picked the employees on a points sytem which was totally unfair as other people with less experience somehow scored higher, but my husband is opinionated and sticks up for himself at work and they don`t like this, in my eyes he has been singled out, I`m not saying this to be bitter just because he has been chosen it`s just a lot of things have happened and they are just not being fair.

Jimbo44 · 29th October 2008, 11:38

On the face of it this would seem to be a "redudancy" that could be classed as unfair if the "trainees" are going to be doing the same work as that done by your husband.

I agree with qbal's comments above. Your husband should seek urgent advice from either your local CAB, a trade union (if he is a member of one) or a lawyer who specialses in employment law as there could be a case for unfair dismissal.

elche · 29th October 2008, 19:50

Hi Nicolee

Sorry to hear about your husband's problem.

Redundancy is merely a potentially fair reason for dismissal. It has a statutory definition as per section 139 ERA, and situations which fall outside this are simply not redundancy situations not matter what label is attached to them by the employer.

Basically redundancy occurs in 4 situations:

a) The business disappears
b) The place of work disappears
c) the job disappears
d) Fewer people are required to do the job.

Thus if the employer is recruiting for the SAME number of people to do your husband's old job then this is unfair dismissal (assuming 12 months service) as the 'shield' of redundancy will not stand up to the scrutiny of a Tribunal

Get the new job advert (great evidence at ET), minutes of consultation meetings, letters from employer to husband during consultation, go see an employment consultant.

nicolee2931 · 29th October 2008, 20:49

Thanks for the advice guys, I have suspected foul play. What would be the next course of action, would my husband have to appeal against his redundancy or could he just go out and get legal advice which isn't a problem as he can make a claim on our house insurance for legal assistance and let solicitors deal with it all? To be honest the way my husbands employer has been acting just lately he is best out of the place, and today he has been asked to return a piece of equipment which he has never been issued with or ever had any reason to use.

elche · 29th October 2008, 21:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by nicolee2931

as he can make a claim on our house insurance for legal assistance

Don't wait. Do it now. I used to work for a practice that handled employment disputes for a large insurer under legal expense claims.

Probably the best way to fund an employment dispute w/o a doubt.

Normally they only take on claims where there is an over 50% chance of success. Personally, when speaking to the insurance appointed sol, I would stress the fact that someone else has been taken on in his place to do his job.

Good luck .

Oh and don't let the insurer wriggle out from helping you because of some small print in the policy.

netnut · 2nd November 2008, 23:51

Hi nicolee2931 and elche,

I am finidng myself in a very similar situation, I was given notice of redundancy a week or so ago, managed to get it delayed a week as the person I wanted to be my 'companion' as they cutely put it was on holiday.

Anyway I'm a marketing manger for a group of companies, 2, with a couple of divisions each. I do all the marketing for each and they are all in very diverse markets, so impossilbe to promote the same message.

So one of the companies has just hired a Sales and Marketing director, at about £120-150K pa, who has had 2 conversations with me in the six weeks he's been here. The other company with two subs, one of them has hired an outside marketing consultant to do exactly what I was recruited to do. I do have proof of what they have been tasked to do

Do I have a case for constructive dismissal, based on what I have said?

sorry to take over your thread nicolee but felt it was relevant to both of us.

netnut

netnut · 3rd November 2008, 00:06

sorry didn't mean to sign of so abruptly, hit the send button to quickly

warmest wishes

netnut

Oh bugger, my last post didn't register.

elche · 3rd November 2008, 19:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by netnut

one of them has hired an outside marketing consultant to do exactly what I was recruited to do. I do have proof of what they have been tasked to do

Hi Netnut

Redundancy means the role has become redundnant not the person. Thus if someone is doing your work you may have a claim for unfair dismissal as it was not a genuine red situation (assuming 12 months service).

As I said earlier if neither of these apply it was not a red situation:

a) The business disappears
b) The place of work disappears
c) the job disappears
d) Fewer people are required to do the job.

Your example is somewhat more problematic, as the person doing your job is not an employee but an outside contractor.

The important question would be, had the requirement of your employer's business for employees to carry out work of a particular kind (your role) ceased or diminished, or were they expected to cease or diminish?

Thus, the volume of work done by you and now done by the marketing consultant would be relevant. If for example they only work one day a week where you worked five.

As it sounds like people in the org were well paid, and thus i assume you may have been, you should seek professional advice.

Good luck

Che

netnut · 10th November 2008, 14:43

Many thanks Che for your reply, sorry not to have got back sooner, somewhat distracted at the moment. I will of course be taking legal advice and based on how you've read the situation I may well have a case. BTW the high wage paid to this guy is a desperate means of trying to save one of the companies by bringing in a high flyer from our main competitor. The rest of the company's employess are paid as little as the company can get away with...

Once again many thanks

Netnut

meg&mog · 10th November 2008, 17:22

[

Redundancy means the role has become redundnant not the person. Thus if someone is doing your work you may have a claim for unfair dismissal as it was not a genuine red situation (assuming 12 months service).

hi if you only have 10 months service and this kind of thing happens have you no rights then?

Soz to butt in a thread

Meg&Mog

netnut · 10th November 2008, 19:21

Hi Meg&Mog,

Hmm, depends on your individual situation, the UK employment law states, more or less, that you have little rights if you are in employment for less than 12 months. that said if you believe that the position is being made redundant because of 'other' decisions within the business you may have a claim for unfair or constructive dismissal.

Not knowing the grounds for redundancy, difficult to say in your case. bullying is a classic case but hard to prove, been there, you need evidence in any way possible to help your case. I think I have enough evidence to take this further but I have been here for 20 months, so I have managed to get past the 12 month rule.

In all honesty the UK employment rules are designed for employers to get rid of employees as quickly as possible, always the case, just this time enshrined in law.

Sorry can't give you any more help, just make sure you gather as much evidence in relation to the POSITION being made redundant and not the person, this what I have been doing over the last couple of weeks.

One other point, if your employer asks you to supply 'other employment options' make sure you highlight what you do that other people can't do because of your inherent knowledge of the job.

One of my CEOs has already asked me, how much work do I put in to optimise their websites to rank highly in search engines, if they have to ask me that why are they making me redundant?

Hope this helps

best wishes for the future

netnut

patdavies · 11th November 2008, 08:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by netnut

Hmm, depends on your individual situation, the UK employment law states, more or less, that you have little rights if you are in employment for less than 12 months. that said if you believe that the position is being made redundant because of 'other' decisions within the business you may have a claim for unfair or constructive dismissal.

Not so. With less than 12 months service, there is no protection against unfair dismissal. (constructive dismissal is a form of unfair dismissal). Only after 2 years service is there any entitlement to redundancy pay.

Quote:

In all honesty the UK employment rules are designed for employers to get rid of employees as quickly as possible, always the case, just this time enshrined in law.

Again not so. Legislation in recent years has strengthened the rights of employees (WTD, TUPE, statutory holidays, etc.)

meg&mog · 12th November 2008, 12:52

Hi Thanks fro replys all

Breifly don,t want to thread steal

My brother has worked for 10 mths as a fork lift truck driver there was a bloke who has been there 25 yrs moved jobs which made room for my brother this guy has decided he does not want his new job anymore and has asked to move back to my brothers section they have now laid my brother off to make way for this bloke having his old job back no body else has been made redundant although letters stating thier jobs were at risk were given out but only to the office girls not shop floor

Any thoughts?

Thanks

Meg&Mog

nicolee2931 · 21st November 2008, 16:30

Well today was my husbands last day with his employer after working out his notice given by his employer, he appealed on November 17th and that failed. He has so far made good progress, he has put in a claim for legal assistance through our home insurance and have completed the forms and sent them off, he contacted the insurers yesterday and his claim has been approved as he does have a more than 50% chance of winning at an ET.

One thing the Employment Rep was suprised about and throught was dubious was when he told him the HR Manager is blood related to both the Directors within the company, and the one director and HR Manager were the ones who decided who was to be made redundant. He was told the role of an HR Manager was to oversee many things including employment law, but was also there to represent the company and employee during difficult matters and had to have an un-biased attitude to sensitive issues. How on earth can someone be un-biased when they are so closely related, any one got any views on that one.

Further to that when my husband had his meetings regarding his redundancy he was told he could only have time off to look for a job and the time allowed was 1 half day per week, he found out yesterday that in fact he is entitled to 2 days off per week ooking for a job, training courses, or time to study whilst on training courses. Which would have been useful as he is training to be a driving instructor. I feel he has been robbed and incorrectly advised of his entitlement to time off by his biased HR Manager

elche · 21st November 2008, 17:00

Glad to hear that the BTE insurer's seem to have accepted the claim.

You should, in theory get some great value for money, when you compare the cost of the policy to what the insurer will now expend on professional fees.

If you have a good case, then at least you have someone to put it forward, and subject to the old chestnut of 'litigation risk' you may well win; if indeed it ever gets to Tribunal.

Best of luck in the ET claim and in your husband's search for a new job

Che

nicolee2931 · 21st November 2008, 17:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by elche

Best of luck in the ET claim and in your husband's search for a new job

Thanks for that he starts a new job on Thursday next week, he could have started monday but has a few loose ends to tie up at home first.

nicolee2931 · 26th January 2009, 15:45

An update, its been a long time since I last posted, The claim against my husbands ex employer is now in process. Solicitor says he has a very good chance of success against this sham redundancy. My hubbys ex employer has until 29th Jan 2009 to respond to his ET1 form, checked with the solicitor today and nothing back yet from the otherside, if they don't reply to the tribunal what will the outcome be? Solicitor said he is setting out a shedule of loss which he can amend or add to what is this? and he said my hubby must inform him if he get's paid for any temporary work or if he starts a new job, is this a sign of a hearing date being set or is it just preperation work for later. In the meantime my hubby has photographs of these new members of staff doing their daily activities, in the same fashion as my husband did, is it worth keeping them for the hearing.

One final point, a short while after submitting the ET1 a letter from ACAS landed on the doormat offering conciliation upto 2nd April 2009 what does that mean as ACAS wasn't interested until we set the solicitors upon hubby's ex employer.

nicolee2931 · 28th January 2009, 00:11

Hi guys I need a little info, my husband has found out some further information today that adds yet more weight to his case. Since my husband left the company at the end of November 2008 he has since found out that there have yet been more new starters taken on into the same role, some as recent as last week some of them being previously made redundant employees with much less experience than my hubby. Another point I would like to make is when hubby was made redundant he was told that this was partly due to the contract he was working on was comming to an end, he has found out today that the contract never actually came to an end and is likely to continue for at least another YEAR!

My question is now the case is at tribunal stage can my husband ask the tribunal to make investigations or make a request for documents confirming new starters and the dates, roles, departments they started in. Also making a specific request regarding this supposed contact which was comming to an end which never did. Any help would be most welcome.

CAG Products - We think that these will help you to make your claim or Reclaim your Right These sales also help us to keep helping YOU and ensure this site will remain free to use!

Small Claims Kit--	Small Claims Court Guide New Edition	Consumer Action Group envelope labels	Last Will & Testament Kit	Fight a Motoring Ticket

Alternatively you could purchase a CAG email address here, or maybe you'd prefer our address labels here
UPDATE: Consumer Forums ConsumerWiki is now LIVE - click here: ConsumerWiki