Hope someone can help. I've been with a company just under 2 years. 2 years as of **th June. They started redundancy consultation today and informed me that I have no right to redundancy pay way there is a PILON clause in my contract. I'm being made redundant because I applied for flexible working hours etc so I know this is going to Employement Tribunal but I'm not due to see my solicitor until Thursday.....the redundancy stuff has happened since the last time I spoke to my solicitor. I've also been off sick due to the stress of it all and I've made a complaint about the way I've been treated since my return. How do I holt the consultation until I've spoken to my solicitor? I don't want to say anything in the consultation that will harm my tribunal case but I don't want to be seen as unreasonable by refusing to have the next consultation. I'm also trying to reduce the stress of all of this. Having to go to a consultation before I'm ready is very stressful. My solicitor could only breifly speak to me over the phone and (quite rightly so) refuses to give too much advice over the phone. But did say that them forcing me to meet when I'm not ready and not giving me adequate time to prepare for the consultation will only go against them. Advice please? I'm trying to avoid going off sick again, as I'm sure they'll try to use it against me even though I've got a great employment record.

Good morning. My better half is currently going through the 'consultation period' for regarding redundancies in her department at a college of further education. During this period they have been told they can request a copy of their 'enhanced' (if choosing to go voluntarily) redundancy package and consider it without prejudice. So, she requested hers, it was sent via email on Monday of this week at 4.30pm and in the email they informed her she must make her decision on whether to take the offer by this Friday! Surely there are rules regarding a 'reasonable' length of time allowed to consider this massive decision? Also, they haven't told her the alternatives - other than to say that "there is probably a job for you in the re-structuring". Again, surely she should be given further information on what that new role will be and under who's leadership and where in the college she will end up BEFORE she can weigh up the choices? It's bad enough that the college is only offering the government statutory reduncancy package let alone adding the above stress to the situation. She's worked there 26 years - doesn't seem to count for much in times like these. Anyway, thanks for any advice/replies given. Stuarto

I have heard today that my company is outsourcing my role and that of 20+ colleagues offshore. They are offering relocation (unlikely as the Indian Subcontinent doesn't appeal) but if relocation is not taken up, they refuse to offer redundancy. Instead they are offering an option to resign with a severance package. This raises questions over Job Seekers Allowance, Income Protection etc. They have categorically said that the are BOUND by TUPE to follow this course; my initial research has found otherwise. Can someone with better experience / knowledge help please as I would to answer "neither" to the offer of relocation and resignation and see what they then come back with and even investigate whether this may amount to constructive dismissal.

I have worked for a small business as a full-time, permanent employee for over four years. We are currently going through a redundancy process and have been informed that our options are either a) statutory redundancy, or b) zero hours contract. The company went through a similar process a few years back, and I know that the two people who chose zero hours contracts last time have done very little work for us since (and I mean *very* little, one has had no work from us for well over a year, the other does perhaps two or three hours a month). So, my question is: is this a real choice, or is the zero hours contract just a way of making us redundant without having to pay us the (miniscule) statutory redundancy pay? Any advice would be gratefully received.

My job is currently at threat from redundancy - which has given me obvious cause to check my contract in more detail. It appears that my notice period is not in line with my colleagues. I joined 5 years ago as a junior straight from university. Whilst my responsibilities, seniority & salary have increased during this time I have not signed a new contract. My contract states my notice period to be 5 weeks (1 week for every year served). However of 20 in our team 17 are on a 3 month notice period as they joined as 'experienced hires'. We all have the same job title / responsibilites and I know for a fact that I am paid more than 6 others. In other words I believe my contract has not been changed through the years to reflect the 'normal contract terms' for a person of my seniority. Do I have legal redress to have my notice period increased to bring me in line with my team? They will obviously not want to change the terms right now as they are in the process of making half our team redundant!

Hi I'm new at this but would really appreciate any advice anyone has to offer. I am currently on maternity leave, due to return to work in January but I have just been advised that my division is closing at the end of December and all staff are in a 2 week consultation period, after which redundancy notices may be given. I have worked at the same company for nearly 8 years. It's a large company and I'm sure they are well versed with the procedures and I am sure they will keep things above board however i am the only one in my division who is a) on maternity leave and b) only works part time (as I reduced my hours after having my first child). I can't see as there could be a position suitable for me so i am kind of braced for redundancy. I would like to know, if I am made redundant: - does the notice period start after maternity leave ends or imediately when informed? - if notice is during maternity leave, is notice pay my full salary or SMP? - should i be expected to return to work after maternity leave to fulfill the notice period? - i will reach my 8-year mark during the notice period (before the end of my maternity leave), will it count to my redundancy entitlement? - at what point am i eligible to start a new job (if found) without affecting my redundancy pay? I know this is alot to ask but any information on the matter would be appreciated. Many Thanks

Apologies if this has been asked before, but I have been searching and can not find my exact problem. My fiancee is on maternity and due to return to work in November (although she was considering extending this). She doesn't wish to go back full time, so contacted her boss recently to discuss her options of either changing her hours, extended her maternity leave and/or find out any other possibilities available to her. She was asked to go into the office to meet with her boss to discuss what she would like to do, which, of course she did, and when she arrived, there was actually a HR representative waiting to meet with her too. During this meeting (after she had advised of the options she was thinking of), she was told that her role was actually at risk of redundancy. They further stated that now they aware of her considerations, they would like to go away, consider her points and reconvene the following week. That meeting took place today and it was confirmed to her that some of the remit of her role, that was being completed in her absence, had already been made 'redundant' and it was re-iterated that her role in its entirty was at risk (the remainder or her duties). They offered her a redundancy package to take effect from her original (i.e. not extended) return to work date and that the meeting they were having today was, in fact, her first (and possibly only) consultation meeting. They were good enough to offer a possible role in the call centre (which will be a telephony sales based role and nothing like her current role), but couldn't / wouldn't offer any further details on it during the meeting. With all of that background knowledge, can anybody advise me please if this all seems 'above board' as she's been very taken aback by the whole situation and wasn't aware that she could be made redundant whilst on maternity leave and was merely trying to discuss her return (date, hours etc) with her boss when she first made contact? I guess what I'm trying to find out is, can they do this and are they conducting the process in a fair and just (legal?) way? Also, without going into detail, the redundancy package they put forward seems pretty poor, is there a 'threshold' that her offer should fall between? Any advice will be very much appreciated.

Hi, I work for xxxxx and feel as though I have been unfairly selected for redundancy. The business plans were to reduce the headcount in my department by 13 people and I am now confirmed as one of the 13. The selection process was based on the performance rating for 2010 and an interview. The rating for 2010 was on a scale from 1-6, where 6 is the best. I achieved a rating of 4 (above average) I was told in a 1-2-1 meeting with my line manager at the beginning of that period (early 2010 before any targets had been set or work completed) that a 5 rating would not be possible for anyone. (At the end of the period I learned that several people were given a 5 rating) My work for the year included a lot of excellent process improvements along with my 'Business as usual' tasks being completed. A standout achievement that I had included the design of a database that increased efficiency in my job by upwards of 50%. Upon completion of this database I was told by my line manager that although it is good it can not be used in an official capacity or to go towards my rating because it would not be supported by IT. (The particular job that I had was subsequently moved to our Birmingham office in January 2011 and they still use the database that I created, presumably fully supported), from that point I was then left on a team that did not have enough work for the amount of staff and was moved a month later to another team (without even being consulted) where the only similarity was the job title. 2 Months later an announcement was made that the department was reducing by 13 heads. When I questioned this recently I was told that I should have appealed the rating at the time, however at the time a higher rating would have only meant an extra £150 annual bonus and I deemed it not worth it. Had I known that it meant the difference between losing my job or keeping it I most certainly would have appealed. The interview was conducted by my new line manager and another manager that was new to the company. I already know that I do not perform well in interviews due to control of my future being in the hands of others; However, I planned well, Dressed well, arrived early, was calm and performed at what I would rate as mid range. When I was told that I was selected as one of the 13 (now 12 as someone had left for another job) I requested the scoring breakdown, as I could not understand how I could be in the bottom 12 ranks. When I received this I was very surprised to find that out of everyone interviewed I had performed worse than them all and only had gained 10 points from the interview aspect of the selection process. I find it absolutely unbelievable that I would be the very bottom performer out of 50+ colleagues. I have been with the company for 4 years which is longer than most and have always had higher than average ratings, it is my feeling that once my main job had moved to Birmingham I was like a 5th wheel that they did not know what to do with. I also feel that as I was interviewed by 2 managers with whom I had virtually no relationship with that this was detrimental to me. My biggest concern however is that even before the interview they knew that I was going to be selected and that the entire process was carried out with a good idea of the 12 heads that would be leaving. I am seriously feeling victimized and mistreated and believe that this may equate to unfair dismissal. I have informed my management of all my beliefs and observations, but I only expect standard answers. I would appreciate it if anyone has any advice on how to proceed with this. Many thanks JP

Hi, Hi, Two days before I was due to go on Maternity leave (I worked as Business Development Administrator for 3 days a week), I was advised I was at risk of redundancy due to my role no longer existing following a restructure. This was fair enough and they advised me that as I was due to go on Maternity leave and given my excellent service, they would like to propose making an exception in my case and agreeing to an extended period of notice with me the duration of my maternity leave. During this period, they would continue to seek out any suitable alternative vacancies that might become available and offer them to me with a view of me returning to work to the new role at the end of my maternity leave period. My SML finishes at the end of this week and by the 21st April, I had not had any contact at all from employers during my maternity leave so I rang them to ask what the situation was as I needed to know if I was going to be made redundant so that I could use the time of my AML to find a new job. During this conversation I advised them that I wasn't happy that I knew of 3 jobs through hearsay (HR Co-ordinator, Client Support Executive and Special Projects Administrator) that had become available while I was on maternity leave but had not been informed of any of them and she said she had thought of that herself. I was called into a meeting and they apologised for the lack of contact during my leave but explained there had been a gap in HR support between the sudden departure of our previous HR Manager and Rachel (HR co-ordinator) starting her role. While I understand this, it does not help me in my situation and they now told me they hadn't felt that the roles were suitable due to my current skills set and because they were full time. I really wanted the HR Role and would have considered going full-time had I been offered it. At this meeting, all they offered me were two separate jobs working 2 days a week for minimum wage which would have meant a drop in a days wages and a drop from 7.17 an hour. I went home to think about my options and decided my only option would be to accept redundancy. I rang and confirmed this but after I received the minutes from the meeting and the form to confirm I would be accepting redundancy and read everything back I was really quite angry about how the situation had been handled and me not being offered the other positions to at least give me a choice. I e-mailed Rachel and advised her I wouldn't be signing the form until they could please give me some answers on why they felt I wasn't suitable for the jobs as I now feel this was said as a cover up for not offering me them in the first place. I have now put in a grievance letter and have been called to a meeting tomorrow. They have now sent me the job spec for the one of roles I mentioned earlier and asking if I feel it is suitable (even though this role had already been filled and they told me originally they thought I wasn’t suitable!). I don't feel it is suitable as it is full time and the only one I would have considered going back to work full time for is the HR role but I still feel I should have been given the option! I feel this meeting should be about how they have originally dealt with everything and why they didn’t offer me them in the first place and not about whether I now feel a job is suitable. Am I correct in how I’m dealing with this? I know this is a long one but I would really appreciate any advice on this before my meeting tomorrow. Thanks in advance.

i have worked for a company for about a year, they haven't paid me for 7 weeks and have went into receivership, i accept vollantary redundancy last week and since then the company have told me the company have called the receivers in.... they still owe me 7 weeks wages but i dont know where i stand or how to get my wages.....can anyone help...????

I have worked for a large local authority for seven years. About 2 years ago I was transferred under a new manager following an internal restructure. A year in, my relationship with the manager was extremely problematic and I submitted an informal complaint, to her manager at the time. 2 months past and nothing had changed, despite the person dealing with the complaint (a senior Director) stating in writing several other complaints of the same nature had been received against my manager, and so I submitted a formal grievance. The grievance was investigated fully, but was not upheld and in most areas it was dismissed. Reading the report, the manager is criticised, and described as “having poor regard for corporate policy and procedure”; and her working methods are described as “not best practise”. The evidence against the manager was/is pretty overwhelming and I believe it has been covered up. I appeal the outcome, it is investigated at a higher level, but is still dismissed, however similar negative comments are made about the manager and my line management is transferred to someone new (at my request). I am praised for my professionalism and courtesy throughout. I intended to appeal this decision but redundancies were announced internally and I became nervous about “rocking the boat” so did not. And that leads me to where I am today: Whist the second investigation was underway; I was informed of staffing reductions in my team – this is linked to the council’s settlement from Govt and is similar across the Country and I fully understand that. My post has been deleted. The manager questioned is ring-fenced to 1 remaining full time post (originally advertised at a grade I would be able to apply for, but when I query this, the grade is increased meaning I am not eligible to apply). The only other posts in the team were proposed to be 3 part-time posts meaning I would not be able to apply. During consultation, they back down and create 1 full-time post in addition to the management post and I have was ring-fenced for interview with 1 other candidate. The appointing panel was chaired by the manager who I took the grievance against. Despite my scoring very highly and being “very appoint able”- scoring an average of 29.5 out of a maximum possible score of 36 I am not successful. The feedback I am given on the day is that “the other candidate had the edge” and “the panel had to consider team dynamics”. The successful candidate is less experienced and is someone I recruited and managed for nearly 3 years. The post is a specialist role, that requires specific experience that I know the successful candidate does not have. I am now on notice of redundancy and am waiting for formal notification to arrive. The Authority will attempt to redeploy me however there are very few posts. My questions is: do I have a claim for discrimination/victimisation given the history to all of this and could this potentially amount to unfair selection for redundancy? I am seeking independent legal advice now and have an appointment later this week with an employment solicitor but I would be grateful for any thoughts you may be able to offer. I have followed posts on this website for years but this is my first go at posting one! Would be very grateful for any thoughts!

Hello im seeking advise.....a few days ago i got a risk of redundancy letter from work....now im one of two receptionists at a hotel that between now and xmas is busy my letter says that due to a turn in business my role is no longer financially sustainable! ( wtf ) i will make every effort to find suitable alternative position blah blah so then it went into consultation period and i was told at my second meeting that one of us has to go and then he scored me on a matrix chart thingy. i have found out 2 other girls are being trained on reception that work in the hotel and i am one of few cross trained members of staff that can work well elsewhere. i know it will be me due to recent events of me making a formal complaint of victimization from a manager whos just horrid to me.... shouldn't that be addressed first? where do i stand if i get replaced? apparently he sends this matrix thing to a legal who chooses.....cant say alot is on the form tho pretty drab tbh PLEASE HELP

I worked for a tech company as a software developer for 2 and a half years. On the 16th February I (along with 9 others) were placed on redundancy consultation. On the 23rd February we were made redundant, and paid 70% of our wages for January. I was told on that same day my redundancy and the outstanding wages owed to me would be paid to me on the 28th Feburary. On the 28th February some staff members (who are still with the company) were paid in full for January and February. When I contacted the company to ask why I hadn't been paid the money owed to me, I was told that the company was suffering from a short term cash flow problem, but it was owed millions by a large UK mobile network operator (and that the money owed was not disputed by the network operator), and that I would be paid in the near future. On the 4th March 2011 the company sent me an email saying an administrator had been appointed, and that he/she would be in contact with me in the near future. I was also informed by former colleagues that they have been told by the company that they would have to enter into a new employment contract with a different company to protect themselves. After not being paid in January 2011, a company meeting was held (all employees attended). At the meeting I asked two of the directors present if the company was trading insolvent. They assured me they had spoken to their lawyers and that the company was not. My questions are: 1. Can the company simply write off the money it owes me (30% of January's wages, 100% of February's wages up to and including the 23rd February, £800 redundancy entitlement) or can this liability be transferred over to the new company the employees who remain at the company are being transferred to? I heard something about a recent case in which a judge ruled that monies owed to employees who were made redundant from Company A (which was dissolved/liquidated) would be owed to those employees by Company B (a Phoenix company - same people/management from Company A) - citing "TUPE"(?) as the grounds for the ruling. 2. Is it not discrimination if the company pays some employees and not others? If it is, how can I take action against the company for doing this? 3. Can the veil of incorporation be lifted and the directors held personally liable for knowingly trading whilst insolvent (they must have known the company was (cash-flow) insolvent as the company was unable to pay creditors/staff on time). 4. How can I find out who the administrator is, and am I permitted to contact him? Any help would be really appreciated as I have not (yet) been able to secure employment elsewhere and my landlord is asking me to leave the apartment.

Hi everyone, My sister works in a small school with 7 teaching staff. 2 of the staff are on fixed term contracts with an end date of 31st August 2011. The Headteacher has recently written to all teaching staff informing them that if pupil numbers do not increase then 2 members of staff will be at risk of redundancy from 31st August 2011. How can the permanent staff roles be at risk when the most obvious course of action would be to just not extend or renew the fixed term contracts? Does anyone know? If a perm was made redundant then that post would need to be filled by either extending or making permanent one of the employees on fixed term.. Surely this means that the post was never redundant in the first place? Thanks

My company is embarking on a program of redundancies as a cost saving measure. We are currently coming to the end of 'collective consultation'. We asked the question "Is there a voluntary redundancy programme?" the answer was that there is no official program, but you can put yourself forward and the company would consider it. The cuts are drastic (about 70%). Some people would prefer to be made redundant. I am considering putting myself forward but I am not really sure what the risks are? Where does that leave me afterwards, if I am declined? i.e. once I 'show my cards' as it were? Collective consultation ends quite soon and then I guess we will find out who has been 'put at risk'. If I am NOT selected, perhaps that would be the best time to put myself forward? Or is there any downsides of leaving it until after collective consultation? Would be grateful of any advice esp. if there are risks I am overlooking. I have been through redundancy programs (and survived) several times before, but I have never wanted to leave before. Thanks.

On the BIS.gov.uk website the relevant section relating to holiday entitlement on termination contains the following paragraph: "If a worker's employment is terminated, they have the right to be paid for leave accrued during the time of employment, no matter how short a period of employment. In such cases, holiday entitlement is based on the date they would have left if they had worked the full notice period, unless the worker agrees otherwise." Is anybody able to confirm, with regard to the second sentence that I have emboldened above - does this actually have a basis in law and, if so, where is it to be found - employment act, working time regulations or specific case law?

Hi, I'm new to this site and in need of some advice. I work for a local council and we have been given letters stating that our jobs are at risk of redundancy. They are deleting all our current posts and creating new ones. There will be 31 redundancies. I am currently pregnant and am wondering if I should start my maternity leave early to try and avoid the risk of redundancy. There are lots of suitable posts I could be offered and believe that once on maternity leave I should be offered a suitable alternative position before any of my other colleagues are offered the positions. If this is the case then it is worth me starting my leave early to guarantee being offered one of the new positions and not risk losing my job. If this is the case I'm trying to find the relevant legislation that confirms this so I can take it to my employers so they are aware that they have to do this. They have also said that we all have to interview for the positions, if I was on maternity leave would I still have to go through this process? Can anyone be of any help - any please if I've got this wrong and being on maternity leave will not be of any benefit to me please let me know! Thanks in advance. Kim

Hi there, I am looking for some help on my impending redundancy. I am a trainee, and work in the Civil Engineering private sector. I was advised last week that I am at risk of redundancy along with the rest of the team as they want to close the close the office. Others in the office have been relocated to another local(ish) office but we did not have that option. I am a trainee, and am referred to as such in all correspondence and even on my confirmation of redundancy risk letter. I wonder if it is actually legal to make a trainee redundant? I don't think it is morally, or ethically, right to do so but I guess it's down to what the law says - and that's where I'm stuck. The law seems quite murky on this subject and am struggling to get my head around it. If I am made redundant I will effectively be left on the scrap pile in the immediate future as I haven't finished my college training/qualifications. I am more than capable of doing the job, and in fact lead others (but that's a different story I guess), it's just the fact that I don't have the qualifications to put down on paper in my CV that puts prospective employers off so I don't know what I am going to do. Any help with this will be greatly appreciated! Thanks