Protected conversation and employment tribunal

[44PumpLane]

Good afternoon all,

I was asked to enter into a “protected conversation” at work (my manager and an HR rep were present).

I asked what a “protected conversation” meant and the explanation I was given made me think it was simply a confidential conversation that “never happened”. So we progressed with the conversation.

This is clearly my fault as I should have said no I would not progress until I’d googled what a protected conversation actually meant.

I was offered voluntary redundancy. One of two people to be offered, they need to get rid of two people.

The other person has accepted the voluntary redundancy, I have not. I believe I will be made redundant at the end of the process anyway and have serveral areas that I believe I could raise a grievance on. However in order to argue that I wasn’t given a fair chance I have to be able to say “but I was offered voluntary at the start of the process” but I can’t do this now can I? Because the conversation was protected?

Or... am I still able to say that, since I did not understand this was the implication of a protected conversation- HR and my manager knew I didn’t know what a protected convo was as I specifically had to ask them what it meant, and then subsequently explained I still wasn’t sure I understood. They explained a bit more in a very blasé manner. Had they said “this convo will be inadmissible in a tribunal” I would have said “no”!

Sorry that was ridiculously long- question is..... can I still tell a tribunal I was offered voluntary?

Thanks.

No. It’s not admissible.

But it shouldn’t impact on the process if you don’t engage in VR. Usually you get a bit more money for signing a settlement agreement following a protected conversation.

Did they tell you in monetary terms how much their offer was worth?

Was it a meaningful amount of money and would the offer also include a reference?

Voluntary redundancies tend to be more generous because it means the employee is amenable to leaving and therefore the company has a ready-made 'gift' in hand, because it's by mutual consent.

If you believe you'll be made redundant anyway, what was your reason for rejecting their offer within the protected convo?

Yeah the deal was statutory plus my notice plus 1 extra month- def not worth it. So I have entered into the voluntary agreement as I would like to stay with the company.

If I can get my manager to reference the VR at some point is it then able to be referenced in a tribunal?

Many thanks for your reply though, it did confirm what I assumed. Although I think it’s a massively underhand thing to do!

It’s really not. Lots of people, employers and employees, can’t be arsed going through a stressful and time consuming redundancy process. It’s a mutual termination.

They gave you the option of entering into settlement discussions and you said no. That’s it. It doesn’t (or it shouldn’t) make any difference to the redundancy process itself.

The fact that you didn’t understand it doesn’t make it underhand.

It doesn’t leave you in any worse a position than you were in if the conversation had never taken place n

daisy sorry I replied as you must have been posting.

They did tell me how much the offer was worth in monetary terms yes.

No mention of a reference was made. The value of the offer was not meaningful- statutory redundancy, my notice period plus 1 month extra, which wasn’t worth it to me.

I rejected the offer as I’m extremely risk adverse and hate the idea of not having a job in hand. If they make me redundant I have to be given consideration for other roles within the business.

So in the interim I will be trying to find employment, if I’m successful I will have a job lined up and be able to take my star redundancy payment after working my notice.

If I’ve been unable to find a role I would be a strong contender for the current roles on offer in my organisation as they are roles I’ve done before and are effectively demotions and would tide me over until I could find a job.

TallTilly appreciate the reply.

The reason I believe it to be underhand is that if I google “protected conversation” the first point in most searches is “not admissible in a tribunal” this was not mentioned at all.

However that was clearly my fault as I should have stopped the conversation, left the meeting and gone back to my desk to google the term. I will not make that mistake again.

Appreciate you taking her time to respond.

But you don’t even know if you’ll have anything worth going to tribunal for yet. You haven’t been dismissed yet.

I don’t understand why you’re thinking this way. Why has tribunal crossed your mind when nothing has happened yet?!

Oh, sorry, I have another thread on here.
There is a worker on a fixed term contract who should have left by now as she is covering maternity in a roundabout way and the person on maternity has returned and had nothing to do for several months now.

They have created a role in the new structure that, to anyone impartial, is effectively a role for the fixed term contract worker.

Myself and the other person offered voluntary redundancy have been physically separated from the rest of the team in a desk move 4 months ago.

There are a couple other smaller things that in a whole package make me believe the process is weighted against me. I could very well be wrong- however I’d rather have all the info and not need it, rather than wait.

In all likelihood the fixed term worker has the same rights as you do. She/he can't be selected for redundancy simply because they are fixed term. That would be in breach of the fixed term worker legislation.

I don't understand what you are trying to achieve here. The protected conversation cannot be raised in tribunal to the extent that it relates to an unfair dismissal claim. It is not however "protected" in relation to any discrimination claims.

It isn't underhand, it is a normal part of many processes. If you are wanting to use the fact that you were offered a severance package to effectively show that the redundancy was a fait accompli you are unlikely to get very far unless you can show that discrimination is a factor.

I'm an employment solicitor

cloudtree appreciate the reply. That’s very clear and very helpful.