Made redundant on maternity leave whilst expecting second child. Need a good lawer

[barbosska]

Hope someone could help to guide us in the right directions.

After 17 years of working for a bank in London my sister, whilst on maternity leave, was told that her contract will not be extended as the bank is moving some of their operations, including her job, abroad.

Her 17 years of service consisted of 9 annual daily rate contracts, followed by a 5 year fixed term contract extended by another 3 years.

They've said she is not eligible for any redundancy pay, as she is not a regular employee, so her fixed term contract will just come to an end and will not be extended.

She is also expecting her second child and notified her employer, but this did not change its position.

She has applied for 3 newly announced positions in her department but was not offered any of them ( I suppose because she is pregnant, although they have of corse said that other candidates had more experience).

Under UK law she would have been protected, but this particular bank is not subject to UK Law, but a subject to an International Administrative Law.

She has applied to the internal grievance committee, which has come back with a list of tricky legal questions and so we are frantically searching for a lawyer with experience in International Administrative law, not UK employment law, because the bank is immune from it.

He maternity leave is unpaid and lawyers charge 400+VAT/hour, so are not affordable. Are there any charities which can help?

So if anyone has any idea, please kindly get back to me. thank you

I'm not a lawyer... but is she really redundant? They've not agreed to renew her fixed term contract.

I'm also not sure she has been made redundant. They simply have not renewed her contract? Isn't this the point of fixed term contracts?

Not in UK employment law once an employee has been employed with the organisation for more than 2 years. Then the employee had the same redundancy rights as permanent employees.

Surely the point is she has been on fixed term contracts not a permanent one, Unless it’s been constant extensions of an original contract it looks like separate contracts to me so I don’t think she can claim she’s worked there 27 years. None of her multiple contracts support that

17 years dirty. She’s worked 8 BUT always on a contract with an end date

Bloody new phone! Sorry not dirty

this particular bank is not subject to UK Law, but a subject to an International Administrative Law.

Does that also extend to employment rights then? If she really can't afford legal advice she could try Citizens' Advice. Or ACAS. Both free. She could call ACAS this morning.

First of all you need an international private lawyer who can look at jurisdiction and advise what will apply. U.K. employment law doesn’t not apply just because they say it doesn’t!

Under U.K. law first of all an employee engaged on a succession of fixed term contracts for 4 years or more becomes a permanent employee. That aside, non renewal of a fixed term contract can certainly amount to a redundancy if the reason is the work has ceased or diminished in the place the employee carries out the work.

Depends on the reason(s) for the fixed term contracts. Under UK law after 4 years on a fixed term contract your sister would be considered a permanent employee.

But I can only advise on UK law, which you say doesn’t apply.

She’s going to need to suck up the cost I think. I can confidently say ACAS and CAB will not know much on the jurisdictional issue. She’ll get lawyers much cheaper than that, tell her to try a regional firm rather than a London one. Law society might be able to provide details of a firm.

Honestly, if you have no professional experience of advising on employment law, please stop giving OP dreadful advice on this thread. It isn't just the end of a FTC if she's been there continuously and for so long.

this particular bank is not subject to UK Law, but a subject to an International Administrative Law.
IANAL, but that really doesn’t sound right. I’m not convinced a foreign company can employ someone in the UK for 17 years, on any basis, and not be subject to basic UK employment law on discrimination.
Definitely ACAS/CAB as first port of call.

Or her home insurance may provide access to legal advice

I would check with citizens advice whether a bank is really immune to UK law whilst having a base in the UK with employees in it. I have a friend who works internationally and has to be very careful where she chooses to live (freelance but for one big employeer) as her employer wont pay her in a country with unfavourable positions on employment. Also be very clear on her language as she isn't being made redundant. Her contract is not being extended. I guess you could argue they have treated her less favourable because of her pregnancy but that may be tricky if they supported her mat leave and extended her contract with her first child. I'm not saying it's not a shitty thing for them to do by the way but it will really help you if you're clear what bit you're fighting.

I don't know anything about the law here, so not commenting about this specifically.

How does a fixed contract ending become a redundancy? Surely when you sign a fixed length you are both agreeing that the contract end on x date?

Or her home insurance may provide access to legal advice

Worth checking out

I've PMd you

It will be very dependent on how her contracts were worded and whether there were gaps between the contracts (even a day). I'm pretty sure all staff contracted in the U.K. are subject to U.K. employment law, the only staff that aren't are those who are employed overseas and are expat workers here - she should check her contract and if it's written from an overseas office.

To answer other questions on here, the ending of a fixed term contract often will be a redundancy situation. TBH most employment lawyers done' recommend that employers use FTCs other than in very particular circumstances since they don't really bring much benefit.

Why do so many people post 'legal advice' without even a basic google to check they are right?

After 4 years of continuous FTC someone accrues the same rights as a permanent employee.

Otherwise employers would just keep employing people on FTCs to try and avoid giving them employment rights - much like the employer in this situation is trying to do.

@RoomR0613 I know. It's crazy.

For others: Top Tip - if you have to google it, don't post on Legal. OP will have done that already, and you're not offering your own advice.

Also, if you don't know the answer, unless OP is asking for your own personal experiences (in which case just tell your own sodding experience - don't then think your capable of offering legal advice on the back of it), step away from the keyboard.

Why aren't they subject to UK law ? Surely if she works here and gets paid here then she should be under the UK laws?

I think she's going to have to suck up the cost of the lawyer if she wants to try and do something. The first thing would be to get advice on this international law vs English law situation and see if there is anything that can be argued there. Otherwise it does sound like they're simply not renewing her contract. I think the pregnancy may be clouding the issue?

We have been told by employment lawers that even though we are a UK based company if we have people working overseas on a perm basis we might be subject to the overseas employment law which really surprised me so 100% agree with checking what they are saying is correct.

If the bank operates in the UK and employs people in the UK, surely those employees have statutory UK employment rights? In which case it is a redundancy situation and your sister would be entitled to statutory redundancy pay. This is the first thing to check out. Some high street solicitors do free or reduced rate half hour sessions - I think one who knows about UK employment law would be able to answer this question, without having knowledge of interest international law.