My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

Chat with other users about all things related to working life on our Work forum.

Work

Job Relocation

12 replies

fuzzyduck1 · 17/01/2017 11:39

I have a general question about this.

Me and my role were TUPE'd to another company in December.

The new company now want to move my place of work to another office which is 150 Miles away. They are at the moment offering no Relocation package just the choice of move of take redundancy.

My question is should they offer relocation and would this be classed as unfair dismissal if i don't move as my role is not being made redundant.

OP posts:
confusedandemployed · 17/01/2017 11:43

I would think you are redundant, provided the relocation is justified. I don't think relocation packages are a legal requirement.

LIZS · 17/01/2017 11:46

What was the mobility policy? if 150m exceeds this then your position should be made redundant. Does this company routinely pay relocation expenses?

fuzzyduck1 · 17/01/2017 12:05

There is no mobility policy. and the new company doesn't have a relocation policy. but my original company did. The job is not being made redundant.

OP posts:
confusedandemployed · 17/01/2017 13:01

Yes but the move would constitute such a significant material change in your T&C that it would in effect mean that the role as you knew it is redundant. I.e. the role in location A is redundant because now the work has to be done at location N.

confusedandemployed · 17/01/2017 13:01

Yes but the move would constitute such a significant material change in your T&C that it would in effect mean that the role as you knew it is redundant. I.e. the role in location A is redundant because now the work has to be done at location N.

confusedandemployed · 17/01/2017 13:02

Oops double posted sorry. And location B - but you get the picture...

fuzzyduck1 · 17/01/2017 16:52

So let me get this right TUPE is just another way for Large companies to make people redundant without getting there hands dirty

OP posts:
confusedandemployed · 17/01/2017 18:19

Without wishing to generalise, there will be a reason why they want to move your role 150miles, probably economic. In order for them to want to have bought your original company in the first place the sums would have had to add up.

If that means making some people redundant and footing that bill, then they will have factored that in.

www.springhouselaw.com/glossary/eto-reason/

I'm sorry this is happening though. It's no fun, I do understand Flowers

confusedandemployed · 17/01/2017 18:20

Sorry probably economic or organisational

fuzzyduck1 · 17/01/2017 21:48

So the law is changing to allowing the movement of a job to be used as an excuse to make someone redundant. but that's not now. Do we know when this new law comes in?

OP posts:
confusedandemployed · 17/01/2017 22:26

No, that is now. The law hasn't/ isn't changing (at least in the last 3-4 yrs).

flowery · 18/01/2017 20:04

It's not an excuse to make someone redundant. Relocation of that distance is redundancy.

Redundancy is defined as follows:

"the employer ceases to carry on the business in which the employee was employed;

the employer ceases to carry on that business in the place where the employee was employed;

the needs of the business for employees to carry out work of a particular kind cease or diminish; or

the needs of the business for employees to carry out work of a particular kind in the place where the employee was employed cease or diminish."

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.