Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Work

Chat with other users about all things related to working life on our Work forum.

Original poster

No redundancy after nearly 40 years at job

127 replies

Blueorredpill · 14/06/2018 08:07

My ex’s department is being moved to somewhere over 20 miles away and because he can apply for a job there, they say he will not be entitled to redundancy. He doesn’t want the extra travel time added on to his day as won’t see his children as much and they don’t pay him enough to cover the extra costs. Understandably he’s in a right state and has been signed off work. I believe he’s had legal advice and seen CAB. Any ideas? TIA

OP posts:
Flumptastic · 14/06/2018 08:14

What does his contract say about his place of work? Does his contract contain an obligation to be mobile ? Sometimes a contract will state that staff are obliged to work anywhere within reasonable travelling distance. Does it say anything like that ? How long will it take him to travel to the new workplace ?

Sugarhunnyicedtea · 14/06/2018 08:18

Can he apply for a job or is he being relocated? They're totally different.

Agree with the above, his contract will have a clause in it that he needs to check.
As an aside, I travel 18 miles each way to work, it's not as bad as it sounds

BakedBeans47 · 14/06/2018 08:19

Is there a mobility clause in his contract?

BakedBeans47 · 14/06/2018 08:21

If there’s a mobility clause they may be within their rights but if not they should be consulting him on it as a redundancy situation. They would then argue that the work elsewhere was suitable alternative employment and he would have to maintain that it wasn’t in order to be entitled to refuse it and claim the redundancy payment

Original poster
Blueorredpill · 14/06/2018 08:22

He mentioned something about a mobility clause, which I’m guessing is in his contract. It would take over 40 minutes to travel, at the moment it takes about 10 minutes to walk from his house, so a bit of fresh air and exercise. He wouldn’t be able to handle the stress of commuting.

OP posts:
KirstenRaymonde · 14/06/2018 08:25

A 40 minute drive really isn’t very much. It’s not like they’re moving a two hour drive away. That’s one hour more travel out of the whole day, I can’t see he has much argument that it will damaged his life to do this.

Vanillamanilla1 · 14/06/2018 08:27

Unfortunately some of us have to do it .. I commuted from Essex to north London on a daily basis , changing at 5 diffferent train stations, it was a ball ache and took the best part of 90 minutes ..
he's lucky he can walk to work in 10 minutes each day
20 miles isn't that bad really .. 1/2 Hour each way ??

Bluntness100 · 14/06/2018 08:27

20 miles isn't unreasonable, particularly if there is a mobility clause.

So no he wouldn't be entitled to redundancy. He must be close to retirement if he's 40 years in the job. So either he takes retirement or resigns.

40 mins is a reasonable commute, which many people undertake. If he's is unable to do it due to mental health issues this would not be the fault of the employer.

Iamagreyhoundhearmeroar · 14/06/2018 08:27

A 40 minute commute would not be seen as so onerous as to make the alternative location non viable, I’m afraid.

I can understand him not wanting to give up the 10 minute travel time (who would?!), but an extra 30 minutes is in no way unreasonable.
How could it adversely affect him seeing his kids?

Bluntness100 · 14/06/2018 08:29

I'd also ask how old are his kids? He must be knocking on 60. I don't understand how an extra hour a day will adversely impact. Especially when half that is first thing in thr morning.

Original poster
Blueorredpill · 14/06/2018 08:30

So his mental health and the fact that they don’t pay him enough to cover the travel costs are not important? Hmm
I really don’t see how this is a suitable alternative. The company have plenty of money so it’s not like they can’t afford it.

OP posts:
bumfluffington · 14/06/2018 08:31

I actually think he shouldn't be entitled to redundancy in this case. I was fully prepared to support, but a 40 min drive? That's nothing!

I was an hour and 20 mins from where i live and it involves a 30min drive, a 20-35min train and a 25min walk door to door each way. It's absolutely fine, you adjust really quick. I also negotiated into my contract 1 day a week working from home which really helps.

As a PP said, it's only an hour a day more travel time, redundancy is a bit extreme.

BakedBeans47 · 14/06/2018 08:31

40 mins is a reasonable commute, which many people undertake. If he's is unable to do it due to mental health issues this would not be the fault of the employer.

This may be OK as you say if there’s a mobility clause, but it’s not that straightforward if he’s offered it as suitable alternative employment to redundancy. In that case, his refusal has to be unreasonable, and it may well be reasonable for him to refuse depending on his circumstances.

notapizzaeater · 14/06/2018 08:32

Has he a union ? If get some real advice ? Could he take early retirement if it will affect his mental health that much ?

Iamagreyhoundhearmeroar · 14/06/2018 08:33

Travel costs aren’t generally taken into account when employing someone...
How much could a 30 minute journey cost?
And apologies if this sounds nasty; but if an extra 30 minutes travel time could impact on his mental health - is he actually capable of doing the job in the first place?

ShotsFired · 14/06/2018 08:34

I appreciate that his current commute is lovely, but I'm afraid I doubt anyone in authority would see a 40 minute, 20 mile commute as the least bit extraordinary or unusual - and certainly not outside the scope of the (very common) clauses found in employment contracts about working location.

Unless your ex negotiated something very specific at the time of joining because of whatever particular reason he cannot do this, it isn't looking promising, sorry.

LIZS · 14/06/2018 08:34

He might be able to negotiate a transitional allowance but the move in itself may be perfectly legal if he has a mobility clause. 40 minutes is not that long on the scheme of things. Could he use the train instead or liftshare?

Bluntness100 · 14/06/2018 08:35

What do you mean they don't pay him enough to travel? He must be on at least NMW. Is his job to manage his finances. His mental health is also his responsibility, it's not the companies, I'm sorry.

Has he sought help? Too ill to travel 40 mins is quite seriously ill.

feral · 14/06/2018 08:37

I commute an hour to work, 25 miles. 20 miles would be a dream.

This is a perfectly reasonable request and they shouldn't and won't pay travel costs. I'm afraid his mental health isn't a consideration.

BaronessEllaSaturday · 14/06/2018 08:37

Is this a whole department move to a new premises or is it a combining of workforce to reduce numbers? Is there an actual redundancy process going on or is he just hoping to get redundancy if he doesn't move to the new work place?

Original poster
Blueorredpill · 14/06/2018 08:40

They don’t even have to move his department. He could stay where he is as it’s all done online. But they won’t consider this.

OP posts:
Iamagreyhoundhearmeroar · 14/06/2018 08:42

Who has decided that he “could stay where he is”? That’s not really for you to say, is it?

BakedBeans47 · 14/06/2018 08:43

even if (and it’s by no means certain) the company were acting reasonably its a bit of a shitty way to deal with someone that’s given you 40 years of good service, by not giving a shit about his travel costs or mental health.

susej · 14/06/2018 08:47

A 40 minute drive? I thought you were going to say 3 hours! I think it’s a reasonable alternative, if ex can’t manage due to his mental health, he could explain that to his work and see what type of things they’re going to put in place for him. Equality act and all.