Hi All,

Again posting on behalf of a family member, I will give you a break down of facts and what has happened to try and stick to the point.

• Partners Sister was employed by a Railway Museum 4 years ago as a curator
  
• She has asperger's syndrome so can be difficult in some social situations
  
• Within the 3rd year she though everyone had a problem with her (how true this was we don't know.)
  
• Within the 3rd year there was a problem with one volunteer that had overstepped his duties (cleaned her office without permission) that caused everything to flair up and he was asked to leave.
  
• Things then broke down at work and she was put on sick leave with pay being diagnosed with depression, this was for about 3-4 Months.
  
• In the meantime meetings had been held with her present asking for her to come back on reduced duties and less working hours (two eight hour days a week from 40 flexable hours over 7 days,) all this was agreed and was in place for about 2 months.
  
• She didn't always go in when she was asked and called in sick saying she couldn't deal with the public (but then would go to steam punk events with friends.)
  
• After some time she was bought into a meeting to discuss what had been going on and it turns out they have made her redundent as they are phasing out her job role.
  
• She has been given a week to decide if she will accept what they have offered her (3 months of full pay approx £5k) or does she want it to go to a tribunal.
  

About two years ago they had another worker that was in a similar boat, she was off sick all the time due to mental illness and they ended up firing her and it went to a tribunal as they did it all wrong and paid her off in the region of £40k, so I now assume they have done everything correctly and above board, but her Dad is trying to find if they have done anything wrong that they can try and use in a tribunal.

Looking at ACAS it looks like they have acted correctly, fairly and legally but he doesn't want to just take their websites word for it and has asked me to put this post up.

So with the above information do you think she has a case for unfair dismissal etc or is there anything she should do / ask from her employer ?

Sorry if something doesn't sound right etc as it's being relayed from her Dad to me at the moment if there is anything you need me to ask her directly I am seeing her Sunday for her Birthday.

Thanks in advance

Also from my point of view I think she may play on the fact she has Asperger's because when something doesn't suite her she will have a break down and as soon as you step down she is back to normal, but then if the same situation that she broke down over then bettered her say a week later she will be absolutly fine with it.

An example is this steam punk event, she will break down saying she can't do public transport to get into work or then deal with the public when they are open but then the next day go to a Steam Punk event and then get there of public transport and then spend a couple days with the public, this happened more than once.

the real question is whether the post is really redundant or are they offering her a package dressed up as redundancy to save going through a dismissal procedure. People who are ill, disabled etc can still be sacked for the usual reasons and you have made it clear she didnt keep to the phased return programme. Fom what you say if they have evidence of attending these events that fly in the face of what she is claiming at work then they are just being nice but also taking a realisitc look at the costs of dismissal and the possibility of a claim at an ET ( which if they follow procedure will most likely win). The obvious grounds for dismissal are capability but could be gross misconduct if they are holding information about her external activities.

What would I suggest? In this case take the offer, they will have to provide a reference that reflects the manner of her departure and this will be a damned sight more positive than the one she would get if she decides to decline the offer. They could also withdraw the severance package and go for compulsory redundancy which will see her with a months salary at best. The risk of going to a tribunal on the basis of comparison with someone else's dismissal is not a good strategy. As you say, they arent going to get it wrong twice. Likewise if the role is redundant then again she will lose and may well end up with a costs order if her claim is reckless, frivolous or malicious.

She must understand something though, she is not staying in that job.

the real question is whether the post is really redundant or are they offering her a package dressed up as redundancy to save going through a dismissal procedure. People who are ill, disabled etc can still be sacked for the usual reasons and you have made it clear she didnt keep to the phased return programme. Fom what you say if they have evidence of attending these events that fly in the face of what she is claiming at work then they are just being nice but also taking a realisitc look at the costs of dismissal and the possibility of a claim at an ET ( which if they follow procedure will most likely win). The obvious grounds for dismissal are capability but could be gross misconduct if they are holding information about her external activities.

What would I suggest? In this case take the offer, they will have to provide a reference that reflects the manner of her departure and this will be a damned sight more positive than the one she would get if she decides to decline the offer. They could also withdraw the severance package and go for compulsory redundancy which will see her with a months salary at best. The risk of going to a tribunal on the basis of comparison with someone else's dismissal is not a good strategy. As you say, they arent going to get it wrong twice. Likewise if the role is redundant then again she will lose and may well end up with a costs order if her claim is reckless, frivolous or malicious.

She must understand something though, she is not staying in that job.

Being a small Museum I imagine they are phasing out the role so they don't have to do through the full dismissal procedure and will add the responsibilities to either one of the other paid staff or among some of the longer term volunteers.

I don't know if they have any evidence of her external activities but it is known by family and friends and it could of made it's way into the railway.

I have said from the beginning to take the offer as they are actually offering her more than she is entitled to according to ACAS but her Dad wants to see if they can go any further with it (that is just how he is.)

They both know that no matter what happens she won't be returning that has been made clear.

I will relay this information over to her and her Dad and see what they have to say, thanks for your input.

the real question is whether the post is really redundant or are they offering her a package dressed up as redundancy to save going through a dismissal procedure. People who are ill, disabled etc can still be sacked for the usual reasons and you have made it clear she didnt keep to the phased return programme. Fom what you say if they have evidence of attending these events that fly in the face of what she is claiming at work then they are just being nice but also taking a realisitc look at the costs of dismissal and the possibility of a claim at an ET ( which if they follow procedure will most likely win). The obvious grounds for dismissal are capability but could be gross misconduct if they are holding information about her external activities.

What would I suggest? In this case take the offer, they will have to provide a reference that reflects the manner of her departure and this will be a damned sight more positive than the one she would get if she decides to decline the offer. They could also withdraw the severance package and go for compulsory redundancy which will see her with a months salary at best. The risk of going to a tribunal on the basis of comparison with someone else's dismissal is not a good strategy. As you say, they arent going to get it wrong twice. Likewise if the role is redundant then again she will lose and may well end up with a costs order if her claim is reckless, frivolous or malicious.

She must understand something though, she is not staying in that job.

I agree with this. The fact is that her father is being ridiculous. Even if this isn't a true redundancy, she has brought this on herself. Her behaviour, disability included, will not reflect well on her in a reference or a tribunal. Assuming she is not going to melt down in a tribunal - if getting her office cleaned causes a problem, she had no idea what a tribunal will do to get! Sometimes it is worth recalling that saying about gift horses. She isn't being dismissed. I'd say that's a plus!!!

As the redundancy involves less than a dozen people they have to do very little in the way of consultation, proof of redundancy offering new posts etc, just give the correct notice and say that the job as a stand alone no longer exists for financial technological or operational reasons. They require no real proof the work doesnt exist, they just have to say it has changed and incorporated into someone else's job and that is that.

As for her external activities all it needs is for her to appear in someone else's social media postings and she is stuffed. Doesnt matter she didnt put the pictures into the public domain. On that point even so called private posts in closed groups are public as far as the law goes.

Try and dissuade her dad from getting involved unless he is happy to stump up the £125k that the ET can order against her if it seems to them to be a malicious, reckless etc claim. A tribunal is not a bonus feature on a gambling machine.

As for her external activities all it needs is for her to appear in someone else's social media postings and she is stuffed. Doesnt matter she didnt put the pictures into the public domain. On that point even so called private posts in closed groups are public as far as the law goes.

The OP's description of the family friend and the job role would make it fairly easy to identify her by the employer. There can't be too many small museums where a curator with asperger's is being made redundant.

A £5,000 offer is very reasonable for four years of employment in my opinion, and I'd take it like a shot in a similar position.

Hey all,

Thanks for the replies, I have spoken to her Dad and he is now taking a step back and leaving her to deal with it but her partner is now pushing to do something :/

He says that he has spoken to ACAS and apparently (again this has come from him and not me speaking directly to them myself.);

• They can't just call her into a meeting to make her redundant and have to give her a notice period (they actually did give her a week to decide if she accepts or not and I assumed this would of counted as a notice period)
  
• They have to offer her another job within the company before letting her go (I don't get this part because how do you offer a job to someone if there isn't one, I thought that is what the point in redundancy was.)
  

The only reason I am posting about this is to try and persuade them to not push any further as it could end up costing them money they don't have to get nothing out of it, as stated before this Museum had to pay of an ex worker £40K, they aren't going to get it wrong a second time. If it was me I would have shaken their hands, thanked them and just taken the £5k and gone elsewhere as it obviously wasn't going to work out any longer.

Anyway, thanks for the help and I will pass the information on.

by calling her into a meeting they ARE giving notice. As the tersm offered are better than stat redundancy it would be called severence at this stage and that offer can be withdrawn if she doesnt accept and then they go down the formal minimum route instead.

They dont have to offer another job if their isnt a suitable vacancy, they are not cutting 12 jobs down to 10 posts and it hasnt been made clear why the post is redundant, if financial then there never will be another vacancy

by calling her into a meeting they ARE giving notice. As the tersm offered are better than stat redundancy it would be called severence at this stage and that offer can be withdrawn if she doesnt accept and then they go down the formal minimum route instead.

They dont have to offer another job if their isnt a suitable vacancy, they are not cutting 12 jobs down to 10 posts

This is what I have told them (apart from the severance bit as I wasn't aware of that.) There are no other vacancies at the Museum that she would be qualified to do and they aren't going to be creating one.

it hasnt been made clear why the post is redundant, if financial then there never will be another vacancy

On paper the redundancy is due to the role existing in reality it is to get rid of her as she isn't benefiting the company anymore due to not meeting their expectations / her contract obligations.

Thanks again

Sorry it is supposed to say; On paper the redundancy is due to the role NOT existing

not a problem, that means it is for operational reasons, one of the 3 groups of reasons.

It would be good if you can persuade the people involved to take a look at this thread, Sangie is a FTO for a union, my union rep days are in the past but we lay reps seem to spnd a lot of the time in the 1990's-2000's managing organisational change rather than the more traditional industrial relations problems of pay and conditions.

not a problem, that means it is for operational reasons, one of the 3 groups of reasons.

It would be good if you can persuade the people involved to take a look at this thread, Sangie is a FTO for a union, my union rep days are in the past but we lay reps seem to spnd a lot of the time in the 1990's-2000's managing organisational change rather than the more traditional industrial relations problems of pay and conditions.

I have passed all the details and information on and told them it's not in their interest to pursue it and left it up to them. At the end of the day I can't stop them as it is their problem but I can at least advise. Thanks again for the help.

Hi All,

 

Again posting on behalf of a family member, I will give you a break down of facts and what has happened to try and stick to the point.

 

 

• Partners Sister was employed by a Railway Museum 4 years ago as a curator
  
• She has asperger's syndrome so can be difficult in some social situations
  
• Within the 3rd year she though everyone had a problem with her (how true this was we don't know.)
  
• Within the 3rd year there was a problem with one volunteer that had overstepped his duties (cleaned her office without permission) that caused everything to flair up and he was asked to leave.
  
• Things then broke down at work and she was put on sick leave with pay being diagnosed with depression, this was for about 3-4 Months.
  
• In the meantime meetings had been held with her present asking for her to come back on reduced duties and less working hours (two eight hour days a week from 40 flexable hours over 7 days,) all this was agreed and was in place for about 2 months.
  
• She didn't always go in when she was asked and called in sick saying she couldn't deal with the public (but then would go to steam punk events with friends.)
  
• After some time she was bought into a meeting to discuss what had been going on and it turns out they have made her redundent as they are phasing out her job role.
  
• She has been given a week to decide if she will accept what they have offered her (3 months of full pay approx £5k) or does she want it to go to a tribunal.
  

About two years ago they had another worker that was in a similar boat, she was off sick all the time due to mental illness and they ended up firing her and it went to a tribunal as they did it all wrong and paid her off in the region of £40k, so I now assume they have done everything correctly and above board, but her Dad is trying to find if they have done anything wrong that they can try and use in a tribunal.

Looking at ACAS it looks like they have acted correctly, fairly and legally but he doesn't want to just take their websites word for it and has asked me to put this post up.

So with the above information do you think she has a case for unfair dismissal etc or is there anything she should do / ask from her employer ?

Sorry if something doesn't sound right etc as it's being relayed from her Dad to me at the moment if there is anything you need me to ask her directly I am seeing her Sunday for her Birthday.

Thanks in advance

Apologies as it seems that I'm hijacking this thread:sorry:

But do Tribunals still award this kind of amount (40k)?

Apologies as it seems that I'm hijacking this thread:sorry:

 

But do Tribunals still award this kind of amount (40k)?

Occassionally in discrimination cases, which have no cap; but you're talking really obvious systemic discriminaton

Actually, awards of this size are not unusual. The cap for unfair dismissal is £80,541. However, the majority of claims are for less that this. That is because tribunal compensatory awards are linked to income, and do not compensate for more than 1 years loss of income. Few people earn £80k a year! And many don't have a year out of work either. Most tribunal claims are lower value - employers who dismiss higher paid workers are usually too clever to make mistakes; or settle when caught out. The lack of higher awards is actually a result of the demographics of employment tribunals rather than a reflection of the awards amounts.