Redundancy

[asb1321]

Hi,

I have been made redundant through the process and my job have been given to someone else.

They wanted me to apply for another person job as they were not happy with his performance. The problem was pay which was 20% lower than has I had.

Therefore, I refused to go for that job. As they had given my existing job to another person who is also 15% lower than me.

 

My question is can I take them to tribunal on grounds that I have been made redundant due to lower cost of new employees and they tried to exploit me by asking me to apply for the job which is 20% lower.?

 

Can I also take them on discrimination grounds as well?

[obiter dictum]

How long have you been emloyed for?

[Emmzzi]

did you get redundancy pay?

[asb1321]

How long have you been emloyed for?

 

10 years

[asb1321]

They will pay all my dues including redundancy by end of this month.

[obiter dictum]

I need to be clear in this, they asked you to do another job role but that would mean a pay cut, you declined. They then went on to recruit another individual and gave your current job role to him and made you redundant saying there was no other job role for you in the company on the same terms and conditions

 

is that correct

[asb1321]

I need to be clear in this, they asked you to do another job role but that would mean a pay cut, you declined. They then went on to recruit another individual and gave your current job role to him and made you redundant saying there was no other job role for you in the company on the same terms and conditions

 

is that correct

 

Basically, my region merged with another region so they gave all my work to another employee who is 15% lower pay. Then they asked me if I want I can apply for another region but pay will be less.

 

They wanted me to go for another region so that they can get rid of the person in that region as he was giving them trouble and at the same time they will cut my pay 20%.

 

They were so sure that I will go for 20% lower paid job that when I declined they were shocked and they made me work till the notice period ended so that if I changed my mind they can place me into the job,, whereas in other redundancies in other departments the paid off notice pay.

[Emmzzi]

what selection process was used to select people for redundancy?

[asb1321]

We were given consultation pack 1st draft and then revised 2nd draft and at risk letters. And after the interviews there was consultation with me as I was the only one in my department who was made redundant. In the consultation they did not offer me any substitute but was told that I wasn't successful at interview and I must sign "Voluntary Redundancy Form" to be eligible for redundancy pay.

 

I didn't sign the paper as I didn't volunteer for redundancy but I was told they only give this form and I wouldn't get any redundancy if I don't sign it.

[Emmzzi]

If they are making you compulsory redundant you should still get money (if you have worked thee long enough), but often the terms are worse.

 

I'm struggling to see that you have a case here, due process seems to have been followed. You may no like it, but that isn't the same as it being unlawful.

[asb1321]

They have used the process just to make me redundant but there wasn't any need for redundancy and this what my claim is for.

[Emmzzi]

but your job no longer exists?

[Grotesque]

Hmmm the OP seems to be implying- not completely clearly- that his job does still exist but is being carried out by someone else on 15% less pay.

 

I think- what he is thinking of is, the situation where one has an ET case when your job is advertised, after it has been made redundant!

[Ell-enn]

How many people in your department do the same job as you ?

[SweetLorraine]

At one place I worked at one of the top managers willingly left, quietly taking a huge redundancy package with him. He was replaced by someone with the same job title and the same duties. Of course there was never going to be a challenge from Mr. Moneybags who had left, but it shows perhaps that an organisation doesn't have to tweak a role too much to successfully claim that it is not the same job at all.

 

They have given you redundancy, and offered you alternative employment as well, which you turned down - I don't think you would be getting much from a Tribunal decision if it did go in your favour.

 

As for discrimination, how so?

 

I think you may just need to put it behind you and move on I'm afraid. Sorry.

[asb1321]

Yes correct, they gave the job to the staff on 15% lower pay.

There are 10 managers doing the same job.

I did not ask for any redundancy and they forced me to accept.

How is that possible that employer can just run the process and give my job to someone else for no reason.

There was no vacant job, they asked me if I want they can put me against another manager and we can compete which I refused.

[Emmzzi]

you wrote "was told that I wasn't successful at interview".

 

Which reads to me like there was a selection process for the jobs - you just weren't successful.

 

So that is not just giving your job away.

[asb1321]

Yes, this is what the problem is that they had their mind made up already, otherwise how is that possible that I am doing the job since years and no negative points against me other than I was criticizing their centralization policies.

 

What I am trying to say is my redundancy is not due to I wasn't successful at interview as I had great interview, but more to do with criticizing their policies which has lead the organization to spend more rather than savings.

[asb1321]

Also the selection process was conducted by my two senior managers and not even HR person was involved where as with other job interviews in other departments there was HR person involved.

[Emmzzi]

there is no obligation to have HR involved.

 

did you appeal at the time?

[asb1321]

No I didn't appeal as I was told at consultation that there is no job for me and I was given redundancy form to sign within two weeks.

 

In the consultation pack it was written that if anyone made redundant will be offered substitute but I wasn't. What I was told is that if I want I can apply for another person's job and if successful will have to work with 20% lower pay as I explained above. But it wasn't a substitute job offer as they were saying.

[Emmzzi]

I still can't see any grounds whatsoever for a claim. You need to decide if you are going for a lower paid job or leaving. Harsh, but it's the only options I see.

[asb1321]

May be I wasn't clear. How could I go for the lower paid job when the job was not vacant. They were just trying to cover their back and even if the job was there then it was based in Lincoln and I am in London.

[Grotesque]

So, to sum up:

 

• Your job was 'given' to someone else at a 15% lower rate;
  
• You were told to apply for a job that wasn't vacant;
  
• But was 145 miles away even so.
  

Really?

[Ell-enn]

I think you need to give us absolutely clear details of how the process was conducted which identified your role as being redundant.

 

 

1. Was a selection process used which scored you and your colleagues?

2. Was your score in this process the lowest?