Can I structure this as redundancy?

[fridayschild]

My nanny is PG and will be moving back to the north of England before the baby is born, and quite possibly too early for me to pay her maternity pay. She will go when her DH gets a job there. for us, and for her

DS2 has now started nursery so I think we will ask the next person to start work late a day or two a week (we take the boys to school/ nursery, and carer starts work at 11.30 when s/he picks up DS2), and work late/babysit a day or two a week.

Nanny currently works 8.30 to 6.30.

Could I say to her that the hours are changing as the role has changed, though still a 50 hour week, she says no thank you and therefore becomes redundant and entitled to redundancy pay, which is tax efficent for her - and query also to me? Or is that just dismissal?

And can it be redundancy when I do still want full time care for the LOs? There would certainly be someone else employed to look after them, pretty much straightaway. DS2 is still too young for me to be interested in au pairs, so we are still looking for someone live out.

I also wonder if it's relevant that this thought comes to me at work, where I spend time thinking about tax efficient structures. And childcare. It is entirely possible I am trying to over-engineer this, in which case my thanks for reading so far!

[flowerybeanbag]

Doesn't sound like redundancy tbh, sounds like a minor change in hours which would be a reasonable alternative for her - I think if she refused that she wouldn't be redundant.

Am I missing something? Why do you need to make her redundant? If she's moving anyway she'll just resign surely? She'll still be entitled to SMP as long as she's met the criteria.

[flowerybeanbag]

Just to clarify, a change in hours could make the new job 'unsuitable', but changing the hours to be slightly later 2 days a week doesn't sound drastic enough to make it reasonable for her to refuse it I'd say.

[fridayschild]

It's tax driven. Redundancy money is tax free in her hands, I think to a maximum sum of some amount, and if I can reclaim the redundancy payments back in the same way I could reclaim maternity pay, it would be nil cost to me.

She won't be entitled to SMP if she resigns before SMP can kick in. The prospect of her DH looking for jobs later and later in her pregnancy, and the prospect of moving 200+ miles heavily PG does not appeal to her.

If there is some way I can reasonably (and legally!) get her some pay off at the tax man's expense, I'd like to do that.

[flowerybeanbag]

She is entitled to SMP if she has been employed by the same employer for 26 wks by the time she is 25 wks pg. SMP can't kick in until 11 wks before her due date but that doesn't mean she doesn't qualify for it if she resigns as soon as she hits the 25 wks pg mark.

Is 25 wks pg too heavily pg for her to move? Could she take annual leave from, say 23 wks pg so she's still employed on the crucial date?

If that's no good I can't help you I'm afraid

[MrsWobble]

i'm fairly sure you can't reclaim redundancy payments - it's tax free to her but your bank account still takes the blow.

[flowerybeanbag]

No I'm sure that's right MrsW, you can't reclaim redundancy can you? It's not like SSP or SMP.

Best way to get her some money from the state is to keep her employed long enough to qualify for SMP, even if you give her holiday or something so she doesn't have to come into work.

[fridayschild]

Might be able to persuade her to stay till 25 weeks; I had thought about the annual leave accrual.

This obviously gives me some certainty about when I need a replacement as well, which would be handy.

thanks both