Does this sound right to you?

[MaryMotherOfCheeses]

My friend is being made redundant.

She's worked part time for about six months now, after a year on maternity leave. Before that, she was full time, and she's worked at the same company for about 10 years altogether.

They're telling her that she only gets part time redundance pay, if that makes sense, so she gets 10 weeks redundancy pay but only half of it because she currrently only works half the hours.

I thought they'd calculate it on 9 years full time and then just the last six months on part time. It seems discriminatory to do anything else.

Any thoughts?

Think that's right. This calculator will help work it out.

I was made redundant earlier this year, after having my hours reduced a few weeks/months before. Some of my redundancy was paid on my higher hours, some on the new ones so I guess previous years won't count.

If it's any consolation, it's tax free.

Depends if its Stat or enhanced. Stat is at point of redundancy afaik but enhanced (if any) can be anything they like over an above stat.

She should get 10 weeks pay of whatever her pay actually is. What she used to be paid is irrelevant, and it's not discriminatory to pay redundancy pay according to current hours. Her holiday pay will be less now as well, for the same reason, as is her salary. It's no different.

Think of it as replacing income for those 10 weeks.

if anything it could potentially be unfair the other way around. If it's statutory redundancy pay there is a cap on it, so potentially a part timer could get full pay or near it for those 10 weeks, whereas a higher earner/full timer could get a lower percentage of their normal pay.

OK I follow that.

Thanks.