Voluntary redundancy - does it need to be offered to everyone or just "selected" people?

[ceebeegeebies]

Does anyone know if a company is entitled to 'select' those that they would like to leave (for example, due to performance issues) without making it available to all the staff at the same level or they obliged to open it up?

Bump

Bump again

I may be out of date on this, but the company should publish to staff eligibility criteria, and all those who meet the criteria should be able to apply.

If the number of applicants exceeds the number they wish to reduce the head count by, then they select from those. Performance can then be considered, but the factors used in deciding which applications are accepted should be applied fairly across all candidates and must not breach anti-discrimination legislation.

There's no legal restrictions about voluntary redundancy. Employers can't discriminate, so if they offered it only to members of a protected group, that would be a bit daft.

There's no legal requirement to offer it out across the board, but is very sensible to do that, otherwise employers risk looking like they are manufacturing excuses to get rid of people, and if people selected decline there may be relationship issues, etc etc

If there is not a genuine need for redundancies, even worse.

Scaevola thanks for your advice. I kind of knew that was the procedure but just needed confirmation.

2 people have just been given voluntary redundancy within my company but the rest of us doing the same job were not even aware that it was on offer...it appears that these 2 were 'tipped off' that if they asked for it, it would be agreed

I am about 60:40 that if I had been given the option, I would have applied and not sure whether it is worth creating a fuss if I am not 100% certain that I would want it if they offered it.

Am just a little confused

Flowery thank you for your response.

Redundancies have been mentioned to us in passing as in if nothing changes, redundancies may need to be considered next year but nothing about this year.

It is clear, as it is not a secret that these 2 staff have, and always have had, performance/attitude issues and this is clearly a way of getting rid of them without the hassle of lengthy performance management procedures.

Am annoyed as it would seem to be rewarding crap performance

If you would have taken it there would have been no advantage for you had it been on offer, because your application would have been refused.

Not really any basis for creating any fuss.

Galling that poor performers are getting something you may or may not have wanted, though, I agree.

Flowery you are right Unless there are performance issues with my own work that I am not aware of, then yes my application would have been turned down.

Clearly if I was rubbish at my job I could have had a big payout and be a SAHM