To think settlements/compromise agreements can’t be THIS common…?!

[Uyyyy]

A friend I used to work with recently confided in me that she had an 80k settlement (she was a high earner) after she claimed her boss didn’t like her as she was a single mother to two children with separate fathers and that he used to actively set meetings she couldn’t attend due to school pick up. She said she never had to even go to court, she just caused one hell of a fuss, went off sick and then they paid up. It turns out another friend from an entirely different company got six months pay for basically not much at all other than a fall out with line manager (large accountancy practice). I have also read the thread on here earlier about someone trying to get a settlement after being threatened with a PIP and posters saying to go for it etc… I am amazed by this, surely most companies take a hard line and force you to go to a tribunal rather than handing out a few months pay without the case even being heard?!

@FKAT what other ways? I guess bullying is one

@Meadowfinch what would have happened if you’d not had a witness though? I’ve had loads of implied comments like this but not with a witness

If there's no witness it's harder but still possible. Gather evidence. Eg after the 1:1 write a follow up detailing what was said and send to them. It won't "hold up in court" as it were but you can get a pattern of evidence

You can raise one anyway by simply stating you are.

The largest settlement agreement I ever dealt with was over £500k. Anecdotally my lawyer colleagues have dealt with higher.

My £500k client involved a loss of PHI and pension, so even as a moderate earner, the cost quickly racked up!

I'm being told, after maternity leave that I must return 5 days a week in office. They are giving me a transition period of 6 weeks where I can wfh 2 days a week. I have wfh 2 days a week the last 4 years successfully but the firm have a new 'vision'.

Problem is, I have worked flexibly successfully for 4 years, there are co-workers that wfh but that's written in their contract, we do exactly the same roles, others have been offered a longer transition period from maternity (albeit they are in a different division) and there are others in the firm that wfh off the radar.

They have given business reasons that haven't changed over the last 4 years, so it's worked well then, what has changed now? I'm being told to come in 5 days a week where I will be performing duties for the other employees that wfh, which I was just told could not be done at home. It's not fair.

I've been told it's manager discretion, not firmwide. Then I'm told the 5 day in office rule is the 'firms vision'.

They're inconsistent in their considerations, I'm being put at a significant disadvantage as a working returning mother. I will have to resign.

Any HR gurus think I stand a chance?! Oh, also I am pregnant again which they do not know yet as I'm early stages.

Thanks

But how can you be so certain there wasn't any. There must have something or they wouldn't have paid up?

A company I was director at paid them out regularly. It takes months to get someone out and ttibunals are risky. It’s safer all round to pay out and get rid very quickly. In fairness it was often used when someone wasn’t a fit and not just when they complained.

Companies will always try to a negotiate a settlement deal rather than go tribunal. Apart from employer costs involved in going to tribunal, it also means hours of time investigating and gathering evidence by HR & Legal. It is far simpler to pay the aggrieved employee and make the problem go away. It also avoids potentially damaging publicity for the company.

my company have just exited a ton of people via settlement agreement. I don’t really know why they didn’t just do it via redundancy with an enhanced payout. I guess it’s much the same in the end.

@writingsonthewall because if it is more than i think 15 employees they make redundant they have to declare it and may incur potential market/reputational damage. With settlement agreements they can make hundreds 'redundant' but not have to declare to anyone

Makes sense. Some of the amounts people got were literally insane

Very common, you can settle with someone on 120k for 6 months pay and replace them with a 60k employee (who may not be aa experienced but who cares as long as the margin looks good - customers whatever!) and the company is quids after a year!

(And that’s before you factor in the extra pension costs, life insurance costs you have with a 120k employee vs 60k)

How long does a settlement usually take?

Usually 14 days from discussion to end of employment in the company I worked for. Happened a lot!

@Dueanamechange2025 blimey! Thanks for your reply x

It depends how damaging to the firm it could be if bad things were reported in the press. And how much it would cost in time as well as money to defend it. It might just be simpler to settle, but some companies definitely wouldn't settle on principle. And of course how big and rich the company is if they can't afford a big pay off they will fight it.