So.... If you refuse a pay cut...

[MascaraOHara]

and are consequently made redundant is it discrimination?

completely hyperthetical question but I'd like to know

If you were offered a paycut and didn't consent to it then you were made redundant whilst somebody who consented to it wasn't would the employer be on dodgy ground? or is it completely reasonable for them to make you redundant because you didn't take the pay cut?

Can't see why the selection would be discriminatory per se (or at least would be illegally so).

Even if you refuse the pay cut which leads to the position being made redundant there should still be a fair selection process. Has your employer made people redundant before, and if so what selection criteria have they used?

MascaraOHara - this is what happened to me last November. I was however given redundancy papers first ( notice of letter of consultatoin for redundancy ) and in the meeting informing me of htis decision and giving me the letter i was asked whether I'd consider staying and taking a pay cut. This was in a law firm so I think they must have got this right.

We are on a qtryly programme of compulsary redundancies. They will not make clear the selection process nor will they tell us how the packages are being calculated.

If more than 20 people are being made redundant in any 90 day period then the company by law has to consult with staff representatives and has to set out the procedures for selection and also the terms of the redundancy.

They can in practice avoid this if they 'add' an extra 90 days' pay in every compensation package they give (because this is the maximum award that can be made by a tribunal for failing to follow procedures).

Even if they ignore the rule, and pay 90 days extra, they are still at risk of unfairly dismissing staff if the seleciton process is not clear and fair - individuals would have to raise a claim in the employment tribunal if this were the case. If you win, your compensation depends upon the losses you have suffered (but it is capped). It is a very stressful route to go down.

In these particular circumstances, I am not sure tbh what an ET would think. Many organisations at the moment are making pay cuts and making them compulsory, and when they are able to demonstrate that they have no real alternative to this because of the economic situation they are OK legally (even if it is normally a breach of contract). And if they set out a redundancy process whereby they included individual staff costs as one of the selection criteria then - so long as the criteria did not indirectly discriminate against certain 'groups' of staff (eg flexible working staff versus full time staff or older staff versus younger staff), then I think it would be an allowable criteria.