Redundancy and possible tribunal case

[androbbob]

I am asking on behalf of my DH as he knows that MN has all the answers!

He has been made redundant based on the fact that the place he works in they have to reduce the dept managers from 3 to 2 as a cost saving exercise. There are also six other 'sites' where the scenario is the same.

The process has been carried out correctly and fairly apart from a Personal Development Review which was supposed to have been done in April with their old manager before he left. This never happened and we had three days to prepare the form - again not a problem and he did better than the other two on this part of the selection process.

His main problem is that they had a new manager about 3 months ago who came from a different 'site' and had a different management style to the previous managers he had ben under in the previous 7 years. Again this was something he got used to and then they brought in another dept manager to assist the two existing staff. She is great and compliments the team, but then the consulting period for at risk of redundancy occurred within 6 weeks of her arriving.

About three weeks ago DH was put on a performance improvement plan, as his dept was not performing (but then neither were the other two dept managers) and he has since then improved the Dept perfromance to above the required standard.

Then on Saturday he is given redundancy. He was given a list of other vacancies in the area, one is suitable, but he would rather take the money. He has worked in the same ompany for 28 years and feels his time is spent there.

His main gripe is that if this third person was not brought in then his 'site' would not have been on the list to reduce. There was no pooling of staff and the top x got the positions, so the 3 in his 'site' had to become 2 and another site had 4 to become 2. He has scored better than other staff who are keeping their jons.

Would there be a case to answer or is it just tough luck? I would rather he walked away from it all as we will not be on poverty street (yet) as the payment was a little more than stsutory payment, but people have told him he could get more money.

Anyone got any pearls of wisdom for him??

From the info I'd say its tough luck. Though even if he could get it overturned would he want to go back?

So there isn't really a problem with the performance development review as he scored highly on it.

You say his 'main problem' is with his new manager but it's not clear what that is and how that affected his selection for redundancy.

The pooling is fine. If his site needs to reduce from 3 to 2 it's perfectly fine that the two who will remain come from the three who are currently there. It wouldn't seem fair in a situation where for example another site only needs to lose one, to then lose two because management want to put someone from another site in there.

It seems as though the only problem really is that if the third dept manager hadn't been brought in, there would have been no need to reduce headcount at all. It doesn't sound like a new recruit though, and did he feel there was no business need for the new person in the first place?

The only way it would be reasonable to think he could get more money is if he had a good case for unfair dismissal. He was happy with the process used, the only thing is he thinks an earlier business decision shouldn't have been made.

You say yourself he doesn't want to take other suitable roles available, he would prefer to take redundancy. If there is a job available he's not prepared to take then he has no case for unfair dismissal anyway, although arguing that an earlier business decision was wrong would be a very tough claim to make anyway. Things can change quickly in business and unless he had some kind of proof that they knew his site would only need two within a short space of time, there's not a lot he could do, even if there wasn't a suitable post.

Flowerybeanbag - you are exactly right and echo what I have already said to him - he has no proof that his manager knew about this need to reduce the salary budget before he brought this other girl in. She is indeed not a new recruit and is another long standing member of staff who he has known for years and is an ex manager herself (as well as the other guy). His new manager came from another arm of the business who operate in a completely different management style and all staff have struggled to deal with this.

It is indeed 'tough luck' and I do not know what he would want as an outcome, I think it just came about that several people mentioned it to him. From what I have read elsewhere it would only get him a small amount of additional money and that he would probably never work for that company again. He has know learned that his manager has to cut the rest of the staff budget by 25% so I reckon he has got off lightly.

The only remaining question is - can he take another job while serving out his notice? He has chased up several leads and I can see him being elsewhere within the next two months. He is on 3 months paid time off in lieu of notice.

I really can't see how he'd get any additional money to be honest. He doesn't really have any case at all for a claim so there would be no need for anyone to pay him any more.

If he is on gardening leave as it sounds as though he is, he shouldn't be working for anyone else, no. He could certainly ask his employer to release him early, and they probably would do so, but wouldn't then pay him for the rest of the three months.

Thanks flowerybeanbag - I think as several people said the same thing it made him think that he may have a case. I personally didnt think he did and as it would be me doing the paperwork then I didnt want to waste my time!

I will ask him to check with his HR regarding the notice, but I thought that was the case. He was not planning on starting any work until September anyway, so will have to wait until October now.