being made redundant isn't 'basically the same as being fired'

[TheSunnySide]

Two people have said this to me in the last week.

My post has been made redundant and I leave my job of almost 20 years early next year.
I was offered the chance to take Voluntary redundancy but was told there was no chance at all of my post being saved - I chose not to take it as voluntary, partly because I get more help with redeployment in the company and partly because I wanted it on the business records that I did not choose to go.

Now I am worrying - would it look better to say I voluntarily took the opportunity to leave for new things rather than I was pushed?

I'd like genuine views from people on what they think when they hear someone has been made redundant.

Not sure if it's legal to use redundancy to 'move on' employees but I know that in the business I worked in (in a management position so sometimes got involved in discussions about redundancies which might include my team) where there were a number of people in a particular post but only a few were to be made redundant there were a list of criteria used to select those at risk. The list invariably included things like time off sick, performance gradings etc that could well be reasons that the employer would like to move someone on but would not have been grounds for dismissal usually.

It's horrible that people are saying to you that redundancy is the same as being fired and I would assume that if everyone in your post is being made redundant it will be clear that this is not a reflection on your work. As far as voluntary/involuntary redundancy goes- is there a difference in the pay-out? Also, is there any chance that you might need to seek benefits to tide you over between jobs? If so I'd check that taking voluntary redundancy will not impact your ability to claim.

Who would be asking you whether your redundancy was voluntary or not? Do you mean when applying for a new job? I'm not sure they'd look that deeply into it.

Having said that, I think VR is the better option.

And of course it's about people. In the NHS trust that I worked, whenever they rolled out another 'mutually agreed resignation scheme' it was obvious, of those who applied for it, who was actually going to get it.

But I'll bet you're going to make sure that it's the position of the person who has 3 weeks off sick in August and is constantly 10 minutes late, rather than the person who's worked there 30 years and never taken a sick day etc.

Sometimes the person who has worked for 30 years and never taken a sick day hasn't kept up with the company changes and doesn't work as efficiently or quickly. Therefore, even with a higher or predictable sick rate, another person can bring in more revenue for a company and be more valued. You'll also get the person who doesn't take a sick day but gives twenty people in the office a cold and then half of those people have time off or reduced capabilities, so attendance in that sense isn't always a good thing.

In the past I have taken voluntary redundancy from a long term job, and also been made redundant from another subsequent job.
I found it easier to explain put a positive spin on the voluntary redundancy, the very genuine reason I took it was because they offered me a lot of money and I really wanted the chance to retrain in a different career. As apposed to the straight forward reason I was made redundant in that the company was taken over, when I had been in post for only 9 months, and all my level of managerial roles (1 in each of 4 offices) were then done by staff in the centralised head office. I definitely felt that when applying for jobs after that, that potential employers were assuming I was made redundant because I was not good at my job

No its not the same at all.

On your CV you put that you worked for Bloggo Ltd between X & Y dates. You dont need to put why you left. At interview you will be asked why you left. You put as positive a spin on it as you can and make it as much a positive decision on your part as possible.

I was made redundant a few years ago after 20 odd years with the same company.

My reason for being made redundant was that my role was changing, moving to a new location and it wasnt a direction I wanted to go in so I accepted redundancy.

Conversation moves on. Never been an issue.

Accept any help on offer. I had a good outplacement package which helped with updating CV writing etc.

Good luck. It is a crap situation and I was very angry about it at the time.

I also work in HR. Redundancy is not the same as being fired, and most employers would be sympathetic to job applicants who are on the market due to redundancy.

However as a PP has stated, you can be selected for redundancy, or even if all the jobs in a team going, not selected for any alternatives. There is plenty of scope for employees to be selected for redundancy based on how well they do the job/fit in. Usually the person doing the scoring is being influenced by someone more senior who wants a certain outcome.

Basically, managers will find a way to keep who they want and get rid of those they don't. Even to the point of creating new roles from the old which are different enough to be seen as a higher level, so that in theory they could get rid of all the old employees and recruit the team afresh. I've seen this happen a few times in my career, it's very common for a redundancy situation to be used as an opportunity to weed out poor performers.

When HR has access to 7 years of data they don't always access the most relevant of performance reviews. In my org it's quite common for a high performer to move around a lot and to do some really challenging work and sometimes mistakes can be made - you don't want that high performer than compared with a 'career mid-ranker'. Similarly for efficiency saves sometimes a long tenure individual might have a lower than market salary and if made redundant the company could easily pay out more in redundancy than salary.

ExH was "made redundant" after doing something that was not in the best interests of the company.

Nothing they could fire him for but they implemented a "restructure" purely so they could get rid of him.

(Annoyingly I warned him it would happen but the arrogant twat thought he was irreplaceable and untouchable.)

My DH is finishing this Friday. They were looking for people to volunteer first off which a lot of people did. Our mortgage insurance only pays out if redundancy is in-voluntary so he had to wait it out.

I don't think you would have to specify to future employers whether it was voluntary redundancy or not ? Though voluntary would definitely sound better.
To echo other posters, I've been a manager in a situation where the team had to be reduced in size, and the decision on who to keep was gut-wrenching. However, in the end, we had to decide on performance and value to the company.
Though, some of the best success stories out of that whole mess were 2 people who, quite late in their career (50s) took voluntary redundancy, with a valuable retraining package, and totally relaunched their careers in a different domain. It too a lot of courage, i was very impressed by what they did!

There are lots of factors in redundancy situations. You can be an excellent employee but if you are paid 50% more than a colleague because of your tenure with the company you will be vulnerable. Similarly, your hours may not match the needs of the business or they may prefer to keep someone on who they think is less likely to get pregnant for the third time. Or they may just think you're shit. Not all of these reasons will be justifiable and probably they won't be made public because you would obviously take legal action against them!

So no, it is not the same as being fired. But it can be.

It's not the same as being fired at all. Sure, it can be used as a way of managing someone out, but that has to be done very carefully or the employer leaves them selves open to a case for constructive dismissal. VR is a totally different case - you've chosen to leave.

I've been made redundant twice - or 50% of my reasons for leaving jobs is redundancy The first time we were bought out, head office was relocated and my position made redundant by way of duplication in the new parent company. Second time my team was centralised to a London head office, I was offered the prospect of either a role at the new location or a similar role at my old location, but seeing as the package was 5-figure (and I'd begun to dislike the company) I opted to go.

Both instances lead to new opportunities, much improved new jobs and pay rises of 30%.

a person is not made redundant, it is the post that is made redundant

Id volunteer for all the reasons given
I think it looks better on a record in a way becUse it's like saying you know you'll get a job elsewhere

It might happen here and I'd resign before applying for my own job!

No company will lose its star performer via redundancy.

This makes me smile because when my old company was looking for people to take VR I enquired, and was laughed out of the boss's office

DH has since been involved with rounds of redundancy as a middle manager and certainly his experience would bear out the idea that it's an opportunity to weed out lower performers who aren't quite crap enough to be fired.

If someone told me they'd been made redundant because their office had been relocated a hundred miles away, or their department had been outsourced to India, I'd consider that pure bad luck and no reflection on them. If they said "they wanted to cut down from five to three" then I'd think "huh, you weren't even the third best in your team".

That said, many companies are very good to people they are making redundant, in terms of being very supportive with applications and giving lots of time off for interviews. Voluntary redundancy packages can be very generous too.

I've been made redundant three times in my career. I've never been fired. The only one I've ever been asked to justify is where I had only been with the firm 5 months when I got made redundant (it was a small company and their major customer went under, they got rid of about 50% of us in one fell swoop just to keep afloat). Part of this may be the nature of the roles I've held (I generally work for start ups) but it's really not an issue.

It may also be a good thing. Like the previous poster I've found the change that was forced upon me actually led to better roles with more responsibility and the associated hike in salary.

If someone told me they'd been made redundant because their office had been relocated a hundred miles away, or their department had been outsourced to India, I'd consider that pure bad luck and no reflection on them. If they said "they wanted to cut down from five to three" then I'd think "huh, you weren't even the third best in your team".

definitely agree here !

MrsHm glad you're preening, i had to bloody leave the last job with no pay off because they refused redundancy to me, the fuckers.

It should be the law, if it's on the table for those in the same role then any of us can volunteer.

Rumours of redundancy abound here and I fear the same again. Meh.

The bastards! How is that legal?!

I took voluntary redundancy. I was incredibly lucky in that around the time there were rumours of restructures and redundancies I was headhunted. I made the new people wait 3 months for me, went through the redundancy process and left to the new job with a nice little cheque.
My managers knew I had had enough and had no interest in staying, my voluntary redundancy was because they will putting 8 of us in for 5 jobs. I knew I didn't want one of the 5, but the remaining 7 did. By putting my hands up and saying I wanted out it allowed the others a bit of comfort that there was one less person competing for the job.
Having handled many restructures myself it was always obvious who was becoming disillusioned by the company and what it stands for, I think it takes guts to say "actually this company isn't for me, I don't stand by your new values and ways of working so I'm off" I genuinely disliked the people that year after year we're put into a restructure, moaned bitterly, told us all how crap we were at managers but not once took the opportunity to leave, especially as they'd then spend the next 18 months telling us why our choice was wrong. I'd always say actually your choice is wrong, you knew what we were structuring to, and you stayed, so you now must accept it.
If you want to go, go with your head held high and tell the people who claim its the same as being fired to bugger off

Lorelei, words of advice (see my earlier post) – consult a lawyer!

forget dignity, take the money and run. There is NEVER only one round of redundancies. If you get through your working life without one you are doing well.

In my line of work if a prospective management employee haven't been made redundant at least once, you will question whether they are 'senior' enough for the job.

Can you afford to take voluntary redundancy?

It is the same as handing in your notice as far as the benefits and mortgage insurance are concerned so no money paid out by them