Forced to accept change of contract to include a minimum of 6 hours unpaid work per week

[unclebulgaria67]

I have had this before applied to a contract, but it was not as stringent as the OPs case. The extra hours were not listed, saying you must work an extra 5 hours with the contract hours increased. All that was added was a clause in the contract saying it was expected that an additional 5 hours per week minimum would be expected to fulfill the role. It did not make it compulsory that you had to clock on to work the extra hours and you could work the standard hours in the contract. But if you failed to perform the role doing standard hours, you would be taken down the disciplinary underperformance process.

 

Most companies expect you to work extra hours and quite often it is unpaid. It is only illegal, if it is against health & safety for the type of work or means pay is below minimum wage.

 

Quite a lot of contact centres expect staff to turn up half an hour or an hour before shift, to take part in team meetings or training. These extra hours are not paid, but are expected.

[The Phantom]

I think the thing is here it was never expected and now they want people to start doing it and changing the contract accordingly. It was never necessary to do this to fulfill a role, but now that they have made all these redundancies they need the rest to pick up the slack and should an employee have to accept that ?

[unclebulgaria67]

I think the thing is here it was never expected and now they want people to start doing it and changing the contract accordingly. It was never necessary to do this to fulfill a role, but now that they have made all these redundancies they need the rest to pick up the slack and should an employee have to accept that ?

 

Wait to see the contract and see what happens. Quite a lot of staff may not sign it.

 

I don't like this type of thing, but it depends on the companies finances and whether they need to do it, so they can stay in business. Locally a company increased shift hours and days without any compensation. There was a strike and in the end some agreement was made so both company and employees were happy.

 

There is nothing to stop the staff getting together to seek a negotiation with the company.

[The Phantom]

There is an update on this, my partner was called into an individual meeting yesterday and advised he is now at risk of redundancy and he would be told within 24 hours who from his group of three would be made redundant. Today he was told he is being made redundant and he could go home. On Thursday he is supposed to come back in to be handed his paperwork and given the selection criteria paperwork and information on the redundancy pay he is entitled to.

Number of total redundancies in his company : 1

Nice after 25 years.

He wanted to continue working really after 65 but he is now forcefully retired as he won't be finding new equal employment anymore. He will loose his private company healthcare, pension scheme, salary of course. Not bad, eh ?

[Emmzzi]

Sorry to hear that. I would be asking about outplacement support.

[Conniff]

Why will he be loosing his company pension ? If he's paid all these years, it's now time to start drawing it.

[The Phantom]

Sorry, not loosing it. As he intended to continue working and he has to be in a pension scheme at work they would have started a new one for him to run for another 10 years (or for how long he would be working there) with life insurance thrown in.

[tobyjugg2]

Is this not the best outcome for your partner?

 

Given the situation (redundancies) there was no real possibility of working past retirement, and with retirement being so close, the redundancy payment should be considered a nice little bonus - they could have just waited the sort period until retirement age and let him retire.

 

or am I missing something?

[The Phantom]

I have asked him to see what papers he is being given on Thursday and how he was selected from a host of candidates (three people affected) and how they chose him.

Using a redundancy pay calculator he would get just over £14 K plus PILON for three months to make around 20K.

They have notified him of three alternative jobs available, one would be a labourer in his own department. Looking at the alternatives they are all not suitable for him.

But I think he needs to find out how they chose him, i.e their selection process.

Sure it is nice to get a redundancy pay out, but if you planned to continue to work then the payment he is about to receive is less than a year's wage, plus he is loosing private medical healthcare and life insurance.

So need to see if he was fairly selected or not

[ericsbrother]

the company should make it clear what criteia are being used to determine both redundancy and how potential candidates are selected for redundancy/redeployment. As only 3 employees affected their task is less onerous but your hubby should ask for letters rather than accepting verbal threats. If the company cannot show that his post is truly redundant for one of the legal reasons then he will have a case for claiming unfair dismissal. Again, it the company picks him because he wont sign a new contract or work for free or because he is the oldest and near to retirement then that will be unfair dismissal and possibly age discrimination.

Does he want to continue working past normal retirement age at the same position?

If they arent going to budge from what you said about the sole redundancy then you have to consider whether it is better to take the £14k and have no fight or to refuse and take on abattle that will last for a couple of years and cost you money in the short term. You need to speak to an employment law solicitor to determine what the likely outcome of winning a claim against the employer is as it often can be a pyrrhic victory.

[The Phantom]

My gut feeling is the other two guys accepted the change of contract and my partner was refusing to do so. So rather than forcing him to accept the change through dismissal and re-applying for the role with a new contract which may have led to a case of unfair dismissal they are going down the road of redundancy instead.

There was no talk of redundancies in the company until Monday when he was called into a meeting. Three people were in the pool and he was picked within 24 hours. He will only be given the selection criteria sheet tomorrow though. It is not a small company but a large international organisation and he is the only redundancy.

I told him to scrutinize the score sheet, the criteria and also compare with his last appraisal if needed.

We had a look on the internet yesterday for employment law solicitors in the area which offer an initial free consultation as I think he should get some advice on this.

[steampowered]

That doesn't sound like a proper consultation to me. Lack of consultation before deciding to push forward with redundancy turns it into unfair dismissal. The significance of unfair dismissal rather than redundancy is that you would get compensation for all losses flowing from the dismissal, not just a fixed payment calculated according to a formula.

 

Do remember that people don't get made redundant. Only jobs/roles get made redundant. If the role he is doing is not being made redundant, for example if the employer runs off and immediately hires someone else to do the same job under the new contract, that would not be a true redundancy and would instead be treated as unfair dismissal. At the meeting he should ask whether the company plans to hire a replacement for his role.

[The Phantom]

The party line is that the other two guys will be sharing his position. To clarify : there are three of them : two guys in Logistics and a Warehouse Supervisor. My partner is one of the Logistics guys. So when he drops out the Warehouse Supervisor and second Logistics guy will share his role in addition to their own (the two who have agreed to do unpaid overtime).

Although the Warehouse Supervisor really hasn't got anything to do with Logistics, but apparently he will now do part of my partner's role in addition to his own.

But there was no talk of redundancies before this, it suddenly emerged when my partner refused to have his contract changed.

I wonder whether they think they can justify the redundancy route more effectively in case of a claim than the other way.

It all seems very suspect to me.

To answer one of the queries in an earlier post, yes, he did intend to continue to work after his 65th birthday and certain financial plans and commitments were made on that assumption

[ericsbrother]

Then you need to get all of the information about the change procedure, how your hubby was selected and other data regarding redundancy. A copy of the accounts for the last financial year can be had from Companies House (if employer a PLC then you can just ask for them) and that will tell you if redundancy for financial reasons is on the cards. It is clear that the job itself is not redundant but changes to someone else's job description to include parts of this job is allowable but all candidate should have a fair crack of the whip.

It does look like there is a pretty good case for claiming unfair dismissal. The company will resist a claim on age discrimination by just claiming that they did just screw up and admit unfair procedural errors but get out of a (expensive) discrimination claim by admitting the lesser breach. You will need to be able to show an employment tribunal that you did have commitments to work beyond the normal retirement date and the pension scheme rules should also allow it as well (most do) so there is no argument abiout it not being justfied to dismiss at 65 (again, rarely is).

Also be clear what you expect from all of this. If you ahvent suffered financially as a result then there will be little to gain as the payout will be only a few weeks pay. The tribunal can order reinstatement but usually that is resisted so you need to calculate how much money you will nedd to put you in the position you would be in had he stayed in post for x years. You will have to subtract pension income, savings on NI contributions etc so get your figure right otherwise your claim will be challeneged and appealed and that will mean delay if nothing else.

When you have the required paperwork and info you will need to speak to an employment law solicitor. If hubby in a union they will have one

[The Phantom]

Quick update.

First consultation meeting was today, he was handed his redundancy calculation and a copy of his assessment score sheet and alternative jobs were discussed (which were not really suitable due to status , skills and experience)

On his assessment score he was surprisingly marked down on criteria he was praised for in his last appraisal / review.

On his redundancy calculation sheet they put down 1 month PILON (pay in lieu of notice) but I am pretty sure due to his length of service that should be 12 weeks (3 months) , he has worked there for almost 25 years (his 25th anniversary would have been next week)

They also told him he isn't required anymore so he doesn't have to return to work and will only have to attend the consultation meetings. They said it will be paid, but he has holiday left to take anyway, so not sure if they just letting him use up his leave or have suspended him on full pay.

 

He had a member of the works council with him who had a brief discussion with him after the meeting and he felt the whole matter smelled of age discrimination and he should try and negotiate a bigger pay out.

 

Interestingly enough when the big round of redundancies was carried out previously (there were not supposed to be anymore than those) they picked a disabled member of staff for redundancy out of a group of four people. Three not disabled. The disabled (MS sufferer) was chosen. Allegedly fairly. He also lost his life insurance, private healthcare etc and is still unemployed (he is only in his 40s). Due to his illness it is not possible for him to replace any of that. However, rumour has it that he received a little 'bonus' on top of his redundancy pay-out to avoid the possibility of legal action. The same member of the works council who accompanied my partner today also at the time accompanied the disabled member of staff.

So maybe that is why the suggestion to try and negotiate.

 

Next meeting is tomorrow morning.

They are reviewing the PILON payment and will get back to him on that tomorrow.

[steampowered]

On his redundancy calculation sheet they put down 1 month PILON (pay in lieu of notice) but I am pretty sure due to his length of service that should be 12 weeks (3 months)

This is correct. His notice period is 12 weeks, assuming there is no longer period specified in his contract. He can point them towards http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/section/86 which is self-explanatory.

[The Phantom]

Many thanks for the link. They say they are reviewing and will let him know tomorrow morning.

He is due back in at 8 for another meeting

[The Phantom]

Second meeting was this morning.

They admitted they got the PILON wrong and it should be 12 weeks, so they have changed that.

They have given him job details again for factory and shop floor jobs at minimum wage which are not suitable due to status and pay.

Apparently one of the directors who was present kept getting up and leaving to discuss matters with the Finance Director.

After the second time he said the company was prepared to make the PILON payment tax free and add another £1000.- to the pay out if my partner agrees to waive his right to an appeal. They would call that aspect a severance pay. And they tried to pressure him into agreeing to it there and then.

My partner declined and said he has to think that over, so next meeting is now next Tuesday. They wanted it Monday but my partner said he couldn't make Monday as he had an appointment he couldn't cancel. (he is having is car serviced but didn't tell them that). So they postponed the meeting and came back offering him another £1000.- if he waived his rights to an appeal and accepted it there and then.

Again he declined and said he need to consider his options , so they agreed to next Tuesday 8 AM now.

I have said he should contact a solicitor now and get some advice on all of this.

[steampowered]

I think that is absolutely the correct strategy. He shouldn't feel pressured into signing anything 'there and then'.

 

If he had signed 'there and then' it wouldn't have been legally binding anyway. In order to have a valid settlement agreement, the employee must have received independent advice from a solicitor on the effect of that settlement (see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/section/203). It would be reasonable to say that he wants a solicitor to look over the settlement agreement and wants the company to pay for that.

[ericsbrother]

If he accepts the severance then he waives his right to take the matter to a tribunal (they always have a clause in them to say that this is a settlemt for any future claim) so it was wise to say that he would consider it. Do take the legal advice before saying yes or no to any other offer.

[The Phantom]

That's what he thought. They were too keen for him to sign.

He said it was like playing Deal or no Deal and waiting for the next telephone call from the Banker.

[The Phantom]

OK, just to close this thread and report on last developments.

After consulting with a solicitor my partner managed to negotiate a 25K tax free severance / redundancy pay out which is to be paid tomorrow via BACS.

His pension will start in September, so not entirely happy about it all but best that could be achieved under the circumstances.

Solicitor advised that he would be happy to take on his case but couldn´t promise to win it as in employment tribunal it apparently always depends on the judges on the day.

You can loose a clear case or surprisingly win a shaky case. No guarantees at all so he recommended to negotiate a higher pay out, as he thought the company would have had similar advice from their legal council (i.e. no gurantee to win this case)

In the end they met at 25K tax free.

[ericsbrother]

well, that is better than a poke in the eye and will allow you a year to consider what your options are for the long run. I think I would be looking at using the talents of a lifetime to do something worthwhile which paid a wage but not necessarily the same level as before. You will have the pension income plus OAP to live on and depending on pension scheme another cash lump sum to go with the £25k so that will clear a lot of a mortgage etc.

[The Phantom]

absolutely , thank you for all your advice on this issue

[honeybee13]

Well done. Please let us know when you have the money and we'll amend your thread title to show the outcome.

 

HB