Any employment law solicitors on here?

[Februarygirls]

Hi, I signed a voluntary severance agreement in January and received a payout of about 4/5k over and above statutory redundancy. The company told me that if not enough people accepted VS then there may be compulsory redundancies and that I was in a part of the business more likely to be affected. I was told I couldn’t talk to anyone in the business about it and had 5 days to make a decision. I didn’t get any legal advice and they didn’t advise me to, but the agreement says I can’t bring any claims against them. I’ve been told this is invalid because I didn’t get legal advice. After leaving I found out they hadn’t offered the VS to many (if not any) other colleagues on my team and less than a week after I left they were advertising my job. Whilst I accept they may need to reduce headcount in the company (huge company) this was clearly personal as they are not reducing my team, in fact the job advert says to join ‘our ever growing team’. One of my children has had a lot of mental health problems and as a result I’ve had to take time off work, I suspect this is the real reason for them offering it to me. I would never have accepted the VS if I’d have known my actual job wasn’t at risk. I found another job straight away on the same salary but my benefits are significantly less so I have lost a lot financially. Do I have a case to take them to a tribunal? Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

Based on deliberately misleading reasons given by them though.

Yes it’s in the agreement

But you may struggle to prove that. They told you that VS was on offer at an enhanced rate and that if people/ you didn't take it then there may be compulsory redundancies which might be likely in your area. And then advertisewd your jopb a week later.... want to bet it wasn't your job? The hint is in your posts - I will lay bets the terms and pay were lower. Which makes it a different job. Don't get me wrong ... I don't like what they did and it stinks. But it is never quite as simple as people think, so their response will be that they made an offer of a mutually agreed severence in order to achieve an economic outcome - reducing costs. Technically, I guess they should have made you an offer of the reduced terms in the first place, but since this wasn't redundancy, legally they didn't have to. And if this is the case, then they are technically correct - you would have been at a real risk of redundancy. Employment law is far more complex and nuanced than most people think it is.

And I'll be brutal but honest - "One of my children has had a lot of mental health problems and as a result I’ve had to take time off work, I suspect this is the real reason for them offering it to me" Even if that is the reason they could have moved to dismiss. I am sorry about your circumstances, but you don't "have to" take time off work - this isn't the employers problem and they don't care. I understand why you did it, I understand that you made the right choice for your child and you. But employers want people in work and frequent absences are not acceptable.

If they are willing to quickly offer something extra, maybe it is worth it, but given that you have already been compensated for your loss of office (and quickly obtained another post on the same salary), you have little to gain financially, and I would balance that carefully in terms of the stress and time involved in a tribunal when you already have a lot on your plate.

Thank you for your reply. I guess my argument then is that because I didn’t receive legal advice I didn’t understand the implications of what I was signing, which I clearly didn’t!
I don’t agree that I have little to gain, my losses are quite significant in terms of the benefits I have lost.
I don’t think they could have dismissed me for sickness, they told me to take the time off on both occasions and haven’t raised it as an issue. They would have to follow procedure so unless there was more time off (unlikely I hope now) then it wouldn’t be an issue.

I guess my argument then is that because I didn’t receive legal advice I didn’t understand the implications of what I was signing, which I clearly didn’t!

No you didn't, but no court (assuming this went to a tribunal) would ever accept that argument. Nobody stopped you from taking legal advice - you always had that choice. And as this wasn't a settlement agreement it isn't a legal requirement.

I understand that the benefits were substantial - but that factor plays into the employers arguments as much as yours - that shows the economic motivation behind their thinking that if you didn't agree to go then they would have moved to redundancy; and which then undermines your claim that the real reason was discrimination by association since they hadn't ever pulled you up on the sickness absences.

Remember this is a court of law, and I won't say that people don't lie in courts - they do - but are you going to be one of them? Because you've claimed unfair dismissal and disability discrimination (by association). They didn't dismiss you - you agreed your mutual severence, and they didn't discriminate because you've just said they told you to take the time off and never said anything adverse about it (but you are claiming that's the reason). Do you see what I am saying? What you have said in this thread, under no pressure at all from anyone, undermines the claim you have made. If this got to a tribunal, quite probably several (at least) stressful months down the line, how well do you think you would "hold the line" with an aggressive barrister pushing the questions and tripping you up?

You said earlier you'd take £10k if that was all you could win. If they suggest a settlement go in with that - it's not unreasonable as an opening gambit - but realise that in the haggle you may end up going lower. Push too high too fast and they'll step back and let you stew - these negotiations can go on and on for months (even years) and meanwhile you will have to do a lot of work or spend money on legal advice you can ill afford. And just be aware - even if you won a tribunal sometime down the line you could easily get less than that. People massively overestimate what tribunals award based on the one or two they have heard about. They have heard about them because they are the unusual ones!

It was a settlement agreement so I should have had legal advice, that’s why it’s not legally binding and I can bring the claim. I don’t think I’ve undermined anything, just because they didn’t pull me up on it doesn’t mean it isn’t the reason behind it. I’m not sure what I would be lying about? Everything I’ve said is true. I don’t think they could have just made me redundant without doing the same to the whole team, which they didn’t (offer them severance I mean), so I genuinely don’t think I was at real risk as they stated I was. The new job carries exactly the same benefits I had, so they’re not saving any money there, it’s my job they’re advertising. Are you a solicitor? How do you know I can’t afford legal advice and how do you know what work I’m prepared to do? None of this phases me at all. I deal with litigation in my day job (just not employment matters) so I’m more than happy to do this on my own.

Honestly having seen quite a few of these in my time, this will be hard to win. You’re probably right on that they wanted you gone because of your absence level but proving they put undue pressure on you to take redundancy will be tricky.
the courts would also be expecting you to be applying for different jobs with better benefits so it’s important you show the courts You’re meaningfully trying to replace your old terms and not just looking to screw your old employer on top of your enhanced redundancy and current terms .
it could read like buyers remorse which is very common. I’d definitely go for a no win no fee solicitor given your case is weak so you don’t end up with big legal fees .

Hi, what’s your experience please? Why is my case weak. Does the fact that they’ve advertised my job not prove that I was misled? I honestly don’t think I could get another job with the same benefits, it’s not the norm for my type of role. Also, am I really expected to job hop until I find something with the most benefits? That’s hardly fair on me or any employers I move to. I’d been at my last job 20 years, I’m not the type to move around and I shouldn’t have to because of their actions.

Op
I work in senior management and have been involved in a number of redundancy and severance agreements.
I think you need to decide exactly what you’re after. Do you want a financial settlement which given they paid you more than standard won’t be a large amount or it sounds a bit like you want your old job back? If that’s the case you could
propose paying them back the settlement less lost wages and take off where you left off putting you in the same position as if you hadn’t taken their offer.

what I mean by being seeing to apply for replacement jobs. Any agreement wouldn’t assume that you would be financially disadvantaged for ever even if you took a lesser role immediately ( which actually might hurt your case) . Courts generally assume a worst case scenario of that the person can work back up to the package they had. They probably won’t accept that is unlikely to ever happen.

Either way you need a really good
employment solicitor to advise you on your real chances of success.
Make sure you get a recommendation but you must know that you case hinges on you proving that they put undue pressure on you to accept the offer versus you simply changing your mind . It’s not straight forward

No disrespect but that’s why I asked for advice from solicitors. You’ve no idea how much I would be awarded if successful. I never said I would accept 10k and I haven’t said they put undue pressure on me to accept. They misled me and I have good proof of that. Thanks for trying to help but I’m looking for advice from people who are qualified to help.

Then respectfully you need to pay for qualified advice.

Any advice you get here will be speculative, just as what you're telling us may not be the full story. Not that you're intentionally leaving something out but you also may not realise that some small, seemingly unimportant detail might actually be extremely important and sway your case to either side.

You are also coming across unnecessarily defensive towards posters who say your case might be weak or that legal advice will be costly, your claim could take years, you may not win much etc. I appreciate it's an emotive situation for you but people are giving suggestions to be helpful which doesn't warrant ungratefulness. And as I said, if you want specific, qualified advice then go and pay for it.

I specifically asked for advice from qualified people, I don’t want opinions from people who don’t know the answers. Maybe this isn’t the right place to ask but a qualified solicitor has actually responded and given me very helpful information, so I did get what I needed from this post. It won’t take years and it won’t be costly for me as it’s free to take a claim to an employment tribunal. I’m not defensive about people saying my case is weak, I genuinely want to know why they’re saying that so that I can look into it and weigh up my options. However the poster above has misquoted what I’ve said several times and is making huge assumptions, so that’s not helpful at all and as I said, I did specifically ask for advice from qualified people. If someone posted looking for advice from a medical professional, I simply wouldn’t answer.

How exactly do you know the advice you've received here from a solicitor is actually from a solicitor? You're taking the word of internet strangers.

The very first response is actually a qualified solicitor and they've told you to get specific legal advice.

You seem sure it won't take years, but just scheduling a hearing date (and this is after the months of early conciliation, claim notification and response case management) can take a year in itself depending on area and workload. But if you think you have all the answers already then nobody else here is impacted.

As I said if you want tailored advice that is specific to your actual circumstances you'll need to pay for it, you can't stop people commenting on a thread if they're not qualified and you also can't be sure those who say they are actually are.

Early conciliation doesn’t take months and I’ve already been through that. I know roughly how long cases are taking to be allocated a hearing in my area, it’s months yes, but not years. That’s ok anyway, it’s not a problem for me to wait. I don’t have all the answers, but I have done a lot of research and also deal with litigation in my day job so I do know that some things that have been said here are wrong. The information I’ve been given can be checked, but it’s things I wouldn’t have thought to look for, so the lady who’s provided that info has been super helpful. She’s explained that my case might not be worth as much as I initially thought it could possibly be, and that’s ok because I wasn’t sure if I was valuing it correctly anyway. So it’s not that I’m defensive about hearing things I don’t want to hear, because I want the truth, but it’s frustrating when I’ve asked for specific help and then you get answers that aren’t relevant and/or correct. I think I’ll just switch off notifications and leave it here.

Thank you to everyone that’s helped.

I didn't say early conciliation takes months. I said conciliation, claim notification, response times and case management takes months. This is before the calendar is even looked at to set a hearing date.

But sure, I wish you well and hope you heed the advice to see a solicitor.