Is voluntary redundancy the best option here?

[PurpleSky300]

Sorry if the tone of this is unsympathetic - all my sympathy has evaporated in this case, I'm afraid.

My DF is 50-odd, has long-term alcohol issues (falls, frailty, memory problems) and after lengthy periods of absence, his employer found that he couldn't cope with his manual job anymore. He was given a more suitable role with reasonable adjustments but the absence continued, and then offered another role again which he turned down. Now the 'final' hearing is looming.

He doesn't seem to understand any of this and just says "I don't know, I don't get it" to everything I ask, which is trying my patience. I have gathered though that voluntary redundancy has been suggested as an option. Is that likely his best bet, at this point? I can't imagine him continuing to work, in fact I'm amazed he has lasted this long.

It does sound like a good option for him but its not possible to make a person redundant, its a job that has to be made redundant.

If they are offering him a package, I'd take it. The alternative is that he refuses and then they progress through the sickness route. It doesn't sound like the job is particularly good for him anyway. But what will he then do?

Are there going to be redundancies in the first place? Who 'suggested' this?

I'd say it's a flipping miracle if a company, on the verge of potentially dismissing someone over absence, were to offer voluntary redundancy. I'd jump at it with both hands.

Is he in a union? I think there is probably quite a lot to consider. On the face of it VR sounds like a promising option but if he is nearing retirement and u likely to be able to work I wonder if there is a possibility for medical retirement. It will depend on his pension status.

It doesn’t sound like he can carry on though and I understand why you feel frustrated.

So he gets dismissed with nothing for capability reasons or made redundant with a payment of some sorts? Of course redundancy is the better option.
I'd enquire whether it's been suggested by anyone in a position to follow through with it as other than speeding up the process companies don't usually pay to exit employees if they can avoid it

I was wondering about this too (whether ill health retirement / early retirement would be an option). I guess it's for him to find out, really, I just can't get him to engage. Would alcohol-related problems be considered as illness, in these circumstances? I have no idea.

He is being supported by a union. He has also been invited to apply for VR, but that was part of a wider 'offer' determined by age and not really linked to this absence monitoring. I don't even know if the absence issues might void any possibility of being selected if he did apply.

VR isn't redundancy at all - legally speaking. It is a mutually agreed termination.

It is highly unlikely - assumiong he even has an employer who has medical retirement as an option - that any insurer would accept medical retirement based on alcohol misuse.

If he applied for VR it would likley be agreeable to the employer, simply because in so doing he signs away any legal rights to challenge the termination. He probably wouldn't have a case anyway, but even no hope cases cost employers money, so it's often best to go with the line of least resistance.