Redundancy info please?

[BriefNameChange]

Hello. Sorry a few questions for DH who thinks his staff are being shafted (staffa sin he manages them rather than employs them)

DH's workplace is making most staff redundant. They were put on notice for last week, then the date was changed to the end of this week.

Many of the staff have found other jobs that start straight after.

They ahd a letter in their pigeonholes last night stating the date has gone back anohter week, and that anyone who leaves for another job will not eceive redundancy, and they are not to apply for other jobs without permission from the manager (clearly the last bit is a joke, or so you would think!).

We know there are answers on a few contracts hanging in the air, either they have masses of work on none at all depending on how one has been allocated nationally.

Can they do this? Agree a redundancy package and payout then stop it so that people can't move on? The message has been apssed around that it is to force people into walking out to save them paying out (we know that anyone who stays faces another redundancy battle in a few months(.

Also, anyone not being made redundanct as such will be 'fired' then rehired on another contract; if that contract isn't doable for you becuase you won't get notice (you have to start completely different shifts next day) how do you stand? We knoe that if it were same contract you'd get 12 weeks notice, but many of the people have to arrange childcare. Is this another ploy to dforce people intor esignation?

Finally DH'ssecretary has worked FT for 6 yeras then one year PT, they say the FT years dont count as FT when calculating redundancy? Thats probably right but worth asking.

We know we're out anyway as DH has had it amde clear that he's not wanted (only one with kids who need childcare and he face an interview a while back about why he took a ddemanding job with SN kids- er coz kids weren't dx'd then? In one case even born!).

[flowerybeanbag]

It's certainly rubbish about needing permission to apply for other jobs, of course they can't ask that. In fact an employer is obliged to give reasonable time off for job hunting to those under notice of redundancy, so your DH's staff should all be able to take time off for interviews/agency appointments/similar.

I don't know how much notice the staff were given/entitled to, but it doesn't seem reasonable to keep telling them to stay with such little notice. Have a read here there's a bit about starting a new job before the end of the notice period, giving what's called 'counter-notice' and possible risk of losing redundancy pay.

I personally think that in these circumstances, if someone gave notice that they were leaving for a new job having been given notice of redundancy, they would have a legitimate argument that withholding the redundancy payment would not be reasonable. But it sounds as though the employer would fight that so it's a case of whether someone would want to bring a legal case about it. Is it significant amounts of money?

With the people being given new contracts, they might have something. A contract change requires consent from the employee, however if there has been proper consultation and the employee has refused, the employer can fire and re hire on the new terms. The employee can then claim unfair dismissal, which may or may not be successful. If the work would not be 'suitable' in terms of a suitable alternative in a redundancy situation, they could refuse the new contracts on the grounds that there is a redundancy situation and these jobs are not suitable alternatives, therefore they claim redundancy pay.

All this might require people to take some legal action though. Is there a union at all? A staff association? It would always be better tackling this type of thing as a group I think. Could they get together and go and see CAB? Or nominate someone to talk to ACAS?

Your DH's secretary's previous FT service is irrelevant I'm afraid - it's all based on current earnings.