Company founder made redundant after acquisition

[Christmascookiesmmmm]

Wondering if anyone can offer advice.. Just concerned about my sister and husband who have 2 small children and are facing a bit of a nightmare!
Her husband started a tech company with friends about 5 years ago.. got invested in many times , he was acting ceo, then they bought in a ceo from America in as there was investment over there (you can tell I’m a bit clueless about everything) then they asked my sister’s husband to relocate to America , with a 3 year old and 3 month old, and pack up all belongings in storage etc. They spent tonnes, and got married specifically in order to get the work visa (they were already engaged but needed to be married to move..) anyway.. ceo made terrible decisions meaning company came into trouble, people were made redundant, other founders were pushed out by this new ceo, and then after they’d been in America for a few months the company was acquired. Ceo got a 60000 signing bonus but nothing for sisters husband other than a new steady job. After a few months however he’s been made redundant! They’ve said he’ll just get 3 months pay and no notice period. But they still have 8 months left on their €2700 a month rental over there , so that redundancy money won’t cover this apparently. Can they legally claim the rental money from the company, seeing as its due to them that they flew out in first place? Also can he claim for more payout since they don’t seem to have given a reason for his redundancy- apparently he took ‘too much time out for the move’ but this was for flat hunting when they initially relocated, and surely he could have been told then rather than be fired months later.. and he took two days off for poor mental health.. (due to stress from the company) but again seems completely unfair! There is still a uk office, so can he claim he should be offered his old job back?
Thanks!!

You’re asking about US employment law on a UK message board. Good luck with that.

Sounds appalling though.

Is the company UK? I would have thought if his contract required him to have a steady job there would be parameters put in ie 6 months 12 months etc

Can he challenge the redundancy on the basis it breaks the contract?

He should speak to a lawyer. I don't think there are many protections for employees in the US though.

One thing that confuses me, as a company founder, isn't he a director and/or shareholder?

Even if someone posted who said they were a US employment law specialist you'd be mad to rely on their advice.

He either needs to spend no doubt a fortune on a proper lawyer or cut his losses and move on.

Company founder isn't a legal position and after the changes you've described there's no reason he'd still be a director or shareholder necessarily.

In the uk we would seek advice from an employment solicitor.

Solicitor for advice if they can afford a session, if not then I think I’d come back to the UK immediately to find a job then either try and come to some arrangement with the US landlord regarding repayment or forget it if it’s not going to be pursued cross border. I doubt the landlord will lose out and it will be re rented quickly. I’m sure that won’t be a popular opinion but he’s got to do what is right for the family

It will depend on his contract terms.

When you say founder do you mean he created the company or he was one of the first employees?

Did he have a lawyer acting for him when his company was acquired? If so, the "what happens next" to the founder should be covered in that. It is common to sack the founder fairly soon after the acquisition as the purchaser wants the company which has been created but wants to do their own thing with it so see the founder as a bit of a hindrance; in other circumstances, the founder is key to what the purchaser wants to achieve over the first few years and so the founder can't leave without paying some of the money back.
What happens about the relocation and if it went wrong should be covered by the relocation package which will have been signed by both of them. In this sort of situation, it is usually the case that some sort of service apartment or short term let will be found by the company for the first few months whilst the trailing spouse house hunts (usually with the aid of an agent engaged by the company), identifies two or three properties which are then shown to the working spouse & that's the extent of the working spouse's involvement. I can't image the stress of moving to a new country with children that young and can completely understand that the father might have wanted time off but the US works very differently in terms of time off (14 days annual leave; 3 months maternity leave) and he is now an employee rather than the founder so could easily have breached some of their policies and annoyed them whilst trying to do the best for his family.

Ask A Manager is a good site for US legal advice. It may depend what state he's in.

Unfortunately, in much of America they can fire you for any reason at all (apart from a protected characteristic). It's called "at will employment". Employment contracts are also less common, apparently.

Was he seconded to the US and remained on a UK contract or did he transfer to being a local hire in the IS. This is important

Im a UK employment lawyer and it sounds as though he didn't take proper advice when this was all being sorted out. Assuming the company is a UK company and there was a sale of the business he ought to have ensured some sort of minimum notice period was put into his contract prior to sale. Its very common for senior people to be let go after a sale like this.

There are minimal employment protections in the US and so its highly unlikely they will be responsible for the rent. That wouldn't even happen in the UK where we have very good employment protections. The three months' pay he's getting is likely to be his notice pay since that would be more than he is likely to be due for any "redundancy".

Your brother needs proper advice though from a US lawyer initially and then also probably a UK employment lawyer too. Lawyer would need to see his contract and have a very full and detailed description of what has actually happened with dates etc.

Well this seems out of order to me! Surely he would have had legal advice when the American merger took place? Also as a PP said US/Canada have a very different outlook on taking time off ,and surely your sister could have had a look by herself then shown him the best ones? However onwards and upwards as they say ,if he has managed to start a new company from scratch, then he will do well in any role in UK .By all means seek legal advice but dont spend thousands on legal fees with no prospect of winning the case!