Realised I don’t understand redundancy at all..

[ArgumentativeAardvaark]

Boss has just notified us that a colleague has been made redundant and I have realised that I don’t actually understand how it works.

The context is an organisation where everyone has more or less the same job description, in that we work for clients and we all offer the same skills. Think eg graphic designers. People have job titles like Senior Designer, Designer, Junior Designer and a client will be charged the same for any senior designer. However within the “senior designer” grade, some may be paid more than others due to length of service, or having been recruited laterally.

If there is no longer enough work to support say, 4 senior designers in the team, would you have to apply some sort of objective assessment to decide which one would be made redundant, or could you just get rid of the most expensive one?

Alternatively, if you felt that one of the Senior Designers was actually a bit less talented than the others, could you make her redundant on performance grounds without including the others ina consultation?

This is not me “asking for a friend” but in the current climate I was a bit shocked by the announcement and wanted to prepare myself a bit better. I am not the same grade as the colleague who was let go.

Surely it varies ?
Sometimes a company will offer 'Voulntary redundancy' - packages which tempt people who were either looking for an early retirement or who were not enjoying work at that point.
Sometimes people do a 'last in, first out' policy.
Sometimes, there might be slightly underhand discussions with people they want out - they might not be entirely above board, but that's not saying they don't happen.
Often there will be a 'restructure' and everyone has to apply for the jobs that are in the new structure. This has happened a LOT in public funded roles over the last 10 years.

The company can restructure and change the role of the 4 senior designers who get paid X pounds and say that they instead they need only 3 lead designers who will only get paid Y pounds.

All 4 senior designers can apply for the new lead design posts (paying less than their previous job with less/ different responsibilities) and the 3 chosen must be selected on objective criteria.

But in fact they are going to get rid of the most expensive one or the one they want least.

Thanks. The message has gone out that this one person’s “role” has been made redundant. However there is no suggestion that any of the others who have the same job description were also considered for redundancy.

That doesn't sound fair. Your friend could check it out with ACAS,
www.acas.org.uk/redundancy

It must be the role that is redundant, not the person. If they have made one person redundant without considering others who are doing the same job the individual involved may have a claim for unfair dismissal.

That was broadly what I thought @prh47bridge. However, could they somehow manipulate things to draw the role very tightly and distinguish it from the other with the same job title eg “Senior designer who speaks some Spanish” even though 99% of that individual’s work did not require them to use their Spanish and they could also do all the same work as the other Senior Designers?

So “we now no longer have a need for a person who speaks Spanish”. That role is redundant. When in reality what has happened is that they now only need 3 Senior Designers, not 4?

Also not a lawyer but my understanding is that the requirement for this process only kicks in once someone has been employed for two years - before that, it's much easier to just get rid of someone and they have little recourse unless they can demonstrate discrimination?

I think I have just realised something quite important: am I right in thinking that the employer could have considered all the Senior Designers for redundancy but not told them that they were being considered? ie only the one selected is told, and if she asks whether others were considered the employer can point to a paper trail that shows they were all assessed and scored. However she must keep this confidential (so can’t tell her colleagues). And of course she will not be told what their scores were.

No if you are put at risk you have to be told whilst the process is underway.

The role is redundant and all in that role are at risk until the decision is taken.

But if one of you has been there less than 2 years they can be dismissed for any non discriminatory reason with no recourse.

This sounds like a dismissal. Perhaps it's been badged as redundancy to make the leaver look better?

Maybe they offered her a settlement agreement to bypass the redundancy process.

Can they legally tell other employees something was a redundancy if it was not? I thought that there would be rules against that as it is giving people misonfirmation about the company’s strategy/financial status.

Unless it's blatant, discrimination, or unfair, I find most companies can get away with quite a lot, and chose who they want to get rid of, so long as they vaguely show that it's reasonable, not unfair, and some sort of due process has been followed.

I negotiated redundancy once instead of going through the hassle of an employment tribunal. Gave me some money rather than just quitting. Meant boss just got told off by HR and I got a negotiated reference.

I thought that there would be rules against that as it is giving people misonfirmation about the company’s strategy/financial status.

What rules? That's not really an employment law issue.

My understanding is that all four roles need to be put at risk and you would all go into consultation. Then a decision can be made on an impartial basis. That is, unless they have reached a compromise agreement with an individual ie they offer an individual a deal to leave on the condition they sign away any rights to sue them - usually for an enhanced package. I would imagine that is what happened here. I know lots of people who have got settlement agreements which the business has classed as redundancy.

@Killerofmen

I thought that there would be rules against that as it is giving people misonfirmation about the company’s strategy/financial status.

What rules? That's not really an employment law issue.

OK, no need to be snippy @Killerofmen, this is not AIBU, I did say I’m not familiar with how it all works, hence the questions.

Can they legally tell other employees something was a redundancy if it was not

Yes.

Normally, when someone leaves with a settlement agreement, there will be confidentiality clauses in the agreement that prevent the employer telling other members of staff what really happened. They therefore either have to fudge the issue (e.g. saying nothing about the reasons or talking about "mutual agreement") or pretend it was a redundancy.

So outright lying is completely acceptable then? Interesting.

Echo others. Likely to be a settlement agreement. Employers often refer to these as redundancies, settlement agreements often have confidentiality clauses and easier all round to call it a redundancy. It basically means they needed or wanted to get rid of someone and have done so legally without needing to jump through the formal redundancy hoops. It's very commonplace.

Well I think that is shocking to describe something as a redundancy if it is not, given that in current circumstances we have been told that redundancy is a real possibility if client work does not pick up.

So outright lying is completely acceptable then

There is no law against lying. And I'm not sure I would class it as lying anyway since both sides are covered by confidentiality clauses that mean they can't tell the truth.

General rules on redundancy and process below. However as pp have said what happens in practice can be different. This may not be a proper redundancy.
www.acas.org.uk/redundancy

This is tricky. I have had to undertake a process to dismiss people before for performance or conduct. Invariably, everyone at the office wants to know what’s happened, even though, it’s none of their business and the employee is entitled to confidentiality; I can understand the inclination to simply say redundancy to shut down further speculation. I have not ever lied but said. ‘I can’t talk about it’ which again, leads to gossip and rumour.

To be honest in practice if employers make redundancies, they often choose someone on their own terms and ask them to sign a settlement agreement. I’ve seen it happen at almost every workplace I’ve been at.