Facing redundancy with no pay out - help please!

[PuffinNose]

It continues...
Background: Submitted grievance. Not upheld but recognised manager had serioys failings and we couldn't work together. Suggested I am redeployed. I'm happy with this. My substansive role still exists. Manager still in post albeit with very amended duties. I won't win an appeal and even if I did will still be facing redeployment. Union don't think I have enough evidence for an ET.

Query: I'm now considered at risk of redundancy and there are unlikely to be any roles I can go into. Union are telling me that I won't get any redundancy pay if I am made redundant because my substansive role still exists. I am frankly screwed. What can I do?

[flowery]

The union might be telling you that but what does your employer say? They're the ones who decide!

If they are saying you are at risk of redundancy, I would assume that to mean that unless a suitable alternative post can be found, you will be redundant. Has your employer said anything to indicate they don't intend to follow that logic?

[PuffinNose]

Thanks Flowery, you must be as fed up of this as I am. :(
There are 3 policies:

1. Bullying policy - says that the harrasser may be redeployed or the accusser may ask to be redeployed but nothing else. In my case it was recommended I was redeployed.
   
2. The redeployment policy - Mainly about people who are at risk of redundancy due to organisation restructure but does mention capability and ill health. Says you have a month from going on the register to find a new role and that you get preferential treatment if you met the job criteria. If don't get a new job, you are given formal notice of redundancy and after another month you are made redundant.
   
3. Redundancy policy - Says that redundancy applies when "there is no longer a requirement for the work the employee carries out" and redeployment isn't possible. Says everyone in this category will get redundancy payment as per their t&c except for misconduct / got a new specified type of job within 4 weeks of being made redundant / employee refuses a fair deployment / won't follow legal requiremenrs / leaves without serving notice.
   

I guess "there is no longer a requirement for the work the employee carries out" is the sticking point.
There is the requirement for the job. They just don't want me to do it through no fault of my own.

[flowery]

I don't mean what do policies say, I mean what have they actually said to you?

They have notified you that you are at risk of redundancy? They have said they will attempt to redeploy you? Have they not said what will happen if they can't find an alternative position?

[PuffinNose]

No. They are very vague.

I had to put in an appeal within 3 weeks of the original hearing. As they were ignoring my emails (only way to contact them), I put one in to give me more options.

Now, they are refusing to engage at all. I understand them saying they can't comment because of the appeal but they won't tell me anything apart from one email (after I submitted my appeal) where they confirmed that before my appeal I was "at risk". They haven't even specified what I'm at risk of.

I've told them that I get that they can't pre-empt the appeal but that I need to understand where I stand without the appeal so I know whether to continue ithe appeal. I've asked them outright about refundancy pay. Union got a bit shirty about that but as you say, they need to tell me.

They are just ignoring me now.

I've found something out since I put in my appeal which means I am v, v unlikely to succeed with it. Even if I did I would either be in the same position or a worse one. I can't expand on that, sorry.

So I think, and union agrees that my best option is to just drop it.

If I get redundancy pay it's not great but isn't awful. If I don't, then I don't know.

[Katescurios]

If you had more than 2yrs service then you are entitled by law to statutory redundancy pay and notice. There's a good .gov page about it if you Google redundancy.

[PuffinNose]

Yep. More than two years. But my post still exists.
I have got myself all panicked and flustered.
The last 2 years have been horrible work wise and personally. I was hoping that the aeful work bits were coming to a closure.

[Katescurios]

It sound s like they are saying:

Your job still exists
But you cant do it because of the issues with your manager
There are no other roles we can move you

As a result they have put you at risk if redundancy and entered into a consultation process. Points to be aware of:

• what is your consultation period. They need to provide this in writing along with the justification for putting you at risk
  
• you should have at least 2 formal consultation meetings. 1 to explain the justification and your position as well as providing a financial statement showing Notice, redundancy pay, any annual leave accrued, at bonuses payable. 2 meeting to give the formal decision and end your consultation process.
  
• during consultation you can put forward proposals to the business to save your job. The business must consider and duly respond to your proposals although they do not have to agree thm if they have justification for why they will not work
  
• You are entitled to be accompanied to any meeting by a Union rep or colleague
  

If they are using the word redundancy they have to follow this process.

[PuffinNose]

Thank you Katecurious.
I'm pretty sure they will follow the process but it's handy fir you to have typed out the steps so I know what yo expect. Head still realing a but so policy isn't completely sinking in. Big org, plenty of redundancies over the last few years so HR are well versed.
I'm going to speak to an emplyment lawyer at my union. I really don't understand how they can say I'm moving because of someone else but then that I can't get any refundancy pay.
They are trying to intimidate me into dropping ky appeal.

[PuffinNose]

Sorry for all the typos

[lougle]

If they are using the word redundancy, then redundancy legislation must be followed. Your post will be redundant because for you it no longer exists - you cannot return to it due to the situation you left it in, so the fact that it exists technically is besides the point - you couldn't return to it even if you wanted to. So that post is gone.

[PuffinNose]

That's an intetesting take Lougle.

[flowery]

" I really don't understand how they can say I'm moving because of someone else but then that I can't get any refundancy pay."

But it doesn't sound like they have said that. It sounds like they have said nothing. Don't spend money on a lawyer if you have a union. Get the union working on your behalf, pushing your employer for written clarity on what happens if there is no redeployment option available, and also on how long they will spend looking/waiting for one to become available.

[ExpatinBah]

Speak to ACAS - a great help in work issues.

I maybe wrong but you have been with said company (regardless of role) for two or more years? Then the Redundancy law applies.