Taking a fixed term job that was when applied for a secondment, told when it ends you leave with nothing? is this right?

[Hoolit]

Hi, there is more to this story than what I can put here as don't want to out myself as it's still ongoing but feel a bit like we're being hard done by and hope someone can advise.
Dh job is at risk, as in his section will be gone this year but he's had no formal notice. So he applied for and got a secondment with another internal dept which was to end just after his job would be gone.
Amongst other things it has been decided that they will make it a fixed term appt and when it ends he leaves with nothing.
He's been employed continuously 10years in this place.

If he takes the fixed term and it ends does he really leave with nothing?
Can they extend it and keep him without re advertising?
Can they just decide to change it to fixed term ?

Thanks very much for any input.

Sorry if it's not clear he had accepted the job before they changed it to fixed term.

No, if it's with the same employer then he has continuous service for the purposes of redundancy and is entitled to the payments in the normal way.

Great thanks. Thought it seemed odd.

What was agreed when he took the job and did he get this in writing? Was he put into formal consultation when he was placed at risk -there should be notes.

Where I work we would always put someone who took a fixed term role as an alternative to redundancy back into consultation at the end of the fixed term and offer them redundancy if nothing else could be found.

When he accepted the job it was a secondment, there was some issues with his smt which his union disputed so hr took over and sent him an email the same day saying if he took it it would be fixed term with nothing at the end.

Sorry, all he's had is an email to say he is classed as at risk

Looking at the hr policy if he takes the fixed term he has to resign from his substantive role hence the no redundancy. I'm unclear from the short piece I can see if this is because his substantive role will no longer be there or if this is regular practice.

The end date for his substantive role is linked to other things and the date has been pushed back more than once so there is a good chance it may still be there if the new one does finish.

Fixed term contract doesn't affect redundancy rights. If he's been there 10 years continuously and there is then no post for him, he is redundant and entitled to redundancy just as he would from his substantive post.

Thanks flowery even if as the hr policy states he has to resign from his current role? The new post is 7 months if this makes a difference.

It should be safe for him to resign from his substantive role as long as he actually works any required notice period.
The only way that his continuous employment could be broken is if he takes a break of at least a week (not including holiday or sickness leave) between his substantive role and starting the secondment.

Thank you think he needs another chat with the union who are unaware of this development. He does not want to move until he has something in writing but we need them to agree that he is entitled to a pay out when it ends if he's found nothing else.

Did he resign? Did he write a letter to that effect? If not, a policy which says "if you go an secondment then you've resigned from your job and aren't entitled to any redundancy pay at the end" would not be enforceable IMO unless individuals are signing something to that effect.

Also,why on earth would anyone in that company ever go on secondment? It makes no sense.

He has not resigned, the secondment was a good opportunity to learn new skills in a good dept that could go onto something else and also give him skills that make him more employable elsewhere than his current role. So why does it make no sense? He can't leave as he has no role to go to and they won't give him vr as his role is there another 6 months and then if there is an alternative suitable role they could slot him in they will, so it could be a crap one they can't fill!
Anyway my question was that they have now changed the job he accepted from a secondment to a fixed term and said when it ends he leaves with nothing, can they do this?

I meant a policy that says if you go on secondment you have effectively resigned, then it's hardly an incentive for people to move, learn new skills etc, so it's a bad policy for the company.

Well, if he hasn't resigned then he hasnt resigned. He is entitled to a statutory redundancy payment as a minimum at the end of his secondment, if there's no suitable alternative role elsewhere. There may also be a contractual entitlement to an enhanced payment if there's a company policy.

Ah right sorry I read your response wrong but he applied for a sec which is fine he could go back to substantive role when its finished but they have now changed it to a fixed term contract.
he has not started yet and now does not know what to do, hence trying to find out if they can change it like this and if they can not give basic redundancy at the end of the fixed term.
hope its a little clearer, its very stressful! And appreciate the responses

Statutory redundancy pay on 10 years will not be a huge sum of money - think one week/one and a half weeks pay x 10 and the amount per week is capped at a fairly low rate, I can't remember what it is but you can easily find out.

Info here www.gov.uk/redundant-your-rights/redundancy-pay

Capped at £464 per week

Thank you I have read that link and it does read to me he should get redundancy but hr and put in an email he won't. It seems unanimous that they should so will challenge it.
Thank you for all the advice. It is grating that they've changed the terms of the new role but at least we have something to work with.

Is there someone more senior in HR he can speak to? They are quite simple wrong at the moment.

Yes there is, think thats his next stop.