Jump to content


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1403 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi all, i work for a car park who have reently acquired another in the same city.

 

I work alone on a shift basis, as do the employees of the other car park.

 

They state the reasons for possible redundancy are new technolgy (control room) and reducing costs.

 

We have just been told that they are considering making half of us redundant (from 10 to 5 staff) and that one employee would be expected to cover both car parks, which are about two miles apart, over a twelve hour shift.

 

Any unattended requests for help would be dealt with from a central control room in London, although the actions that they can take are limited.

 

They have told us that we can use a company vehicle to travel to each site.

 

We have now been invited to one-to-one interviews for us to give our thoughts etc.

 

My question is, ares their reasons reasonable , and is it also reasonable to say that we dont want to have to drive as part of our working day, as that was never mentioned as part of our original contract.

 

thanks for reading

Link to post
Share on other sites

the employer doesn't have to keep the job the same forever, no

 

if you want a job, drive

if you want redundancy, tell them you are not comfortable driving

 

depends what outcome you want

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Effectively they are saying all of the old jobs have gone and are offering a smaller number of new jobs that have different roles and terms. This is redundancy as defined so they interview anyone who is interested in the new roles and the unsucessful/those who dont want the new jobs are made redundant. Have they said what severance terms they are applying? Stat redundancy or an enhanced one? If the latter consider the terms offered because they may say only stat redundancy for those who dont try hard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 weeks later...

Sorry for the delay in responding, we have since had one to one meetings, and although they have stressed that no decision has been made regarding whether redundancies will take place, they have created a new job spec and given us until the end of this week to apply for the new role.

I have a couple of questions if anyone can help please

 

Do they have to make all ten redundant, as all of the old jobs would be gone, and five new ones created?

 

Also, is it legal for them to state that no decision has been made about the redundancies, but almost force us to apply for these 'new' roles?

 

Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have a google of "suitable alternative employment." Sounds like they are creating 5 jobs under SAE rules and if you are suitable but fail to take up the role then effectively you've made yourself unemployed = no payout.

 

You didn't say if you want to stay or go. If you want to go, apply but make it clear your skills aren't a good match - with subtlety

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

normal procedure, they then employ the best 5 to fit the new jobs. as Emmzzi says, if you dont appear to try to get one of the new jobs they can claim you have effectively resigned so ask about the jobs as well as the alternatives.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...