Employment law advice please

Skandhaless said:
Whether it's tupe or not they are offering three years wage support which I think will be agreed with unions as meaning his services are not being dispensed with unilaterally and the job role doesn't have to be identical just largely similar, it's a podiatrists job isn't it?


He feels its not, true but feelings don't come into it.
Click to expand...
No it’s not
 


sadders said:
Unfortunately not with this trust. The area the department is moving into (high risk and diabetic foot care) is one that I have never been interested in going in to. So really to continue with work I enjoy (musculoskeletal and surgery) I have no option but to leave.
Click to expand...
Sounds reasonable. Ultimately, once they confirm your role is redundant they'll outline your options.

If you do not wish to take the new role, tell them in writing and explain your reasons. They'll likely just pay you your redundancy payment at that point.

If not then they'll dismiss you on the basis of your existing role being made redundant and refuse to pay compensation on the grounds of you refusing acceptable alternative employment without good reason. You'd leave employment at that point and you'd be able to take them to an employment tribunal, this will cost them a load of money, so if you are being reasonable, they'll want to avoid this situation.
 
AndrewP said:
Sounds reasonable. Ultimately, once they confirm your role is redundant they'll outline your options.

If you do not wish to take the new role, tell them in writing and explain your reasons. They'll likely just pay you your redundancy payment at that point.

If not then they'll dismiss you on the basis of your existing role being made redundant and refuse to pay compensation on the grounds of you refusing acceptable alternative employment without good reason. You'd leave employment at that point and you'd be able to take them to an employment tribunal, this will cost them a load of money, so if you are being reasonable, they'll want to avoid this situation.
Click to expand...
Absolutely this...and they’ll pay for his legal advise so as to appear reasonable
 
AndrewP said:
It's not TUPE. He has already said the new job isn't suitable.
Click to expand...
Sorry I thought it was "in diabetic foot care when he prefers muscular skeletal and surgery" and they were "allowing him to keep some of his old responsibilities" I presumed he would still be "a podiatrist"
They may well argue it is similar enough and they are willing to ease his wage transition.
I hope @sadders gets what he wants, canny fella, I just don't want him to feel let down if he doesn't
 
The important thing is to get advice before doing anything formally, but as others have said it won’t be Tupe as not changing employer. They may be offering same terms for 3 years to try to look like they are being reasonable.

They are still making your role redundant, imo you should be entitled to either a role agreed by both you and them or an offer of redundancy if no role suitable. Whether the role is a suitable alternative is where things get complicated often.

Good luck
 
AndrewP said:
Tupe wouldn't apply from what you've said and doesn't offer a set period of protection in any case. Tupe is for when you move employer due to a transfer of undertakings.


People aren't made redundant, roles are. The role no longer exists this is a redundancy situation.

If the alternative employment offered is unsuitable and/or the employee's reasons for refusing the alternative employment are reasonable, the employee will be regarded as having been dismissed by reason of redundancy on the date on which their original job role came to an end.
Click to expand...
This.

You also need to check your employers contracts and T&C's. An employer can move you down a grade but do have to keep paying you your current wage for x amount of time, in the case of RBS, this was 1 year. I'm not sure if this was a minimum legal entitlement or RBS' decision. However that said, the alternative role needs to be SAE (Suitable Alternative Employment) based on pay, job duties, location and another factor (or maybe more than one) which slips my mind right now without researching.

What is changing with the role/proposed role? Will you be working in the same location or is this a change? If an alternative location then if this is more than an hour's extra travel (or 30 miles extra I believe), it is not considered suitable. What are the job duties of the new role? Are they mostly similar or very different?

Best thing is to get the full details of the new role, get a copy of your employment contract and the T&C's of the company and check information on the gov website about your rights in a redundancy situation. Your current job role is being made redundant but depending on how similar the proposed alternative is will determine whether it is SAE (which would mean you have no right to a redundancy payment) or not (in which case you should be offered a redundancy payment). Do this whilst waiting to speak to your Union rep and you will better educate yourself.

You also have the right to lodge a grievance in relation to this matter if you fee that the decision being taken by the company is not legal/fair (based on the SAE - not personal feelings). I suggest you consider this option also.

Being made redundant however will likely mean that you cannot work for the same company for at least a year (company will determine this with their policy).
 
Skandhaless said:
Sorry I thought it was "in diabetic foot care when he prefers muscular skeletal and surgery" and they were "allowing him to keep some of his old responsibilities" I presumed he would still be "a podiatrist"
They may well argue it is similar enough and they are willing to ease his wage transition.
I hope @sadders gets what he wants, canny fella, I just don't want him to feel let down if he doesn't
Click to expand...
From what he has said I'd be amazed if he doesn't receive a redundancy payment if he turns down the lower band job offer.

Regardless of the medium term wage protection, he's taking a step down the pay bands, and it's entirely reasonable that someone might not want to do that. Unless the employer is an idiot, they'll pay up now or pay up more later after he wins at tribunal.
 
Oh additionally, when comparing roles/SAE both objective and subjective measures need to be assessed so if you claim that a role is not reasonable for a particular reason, it could be assessed that it is based on objective measures however the subjective measures are those of your own and are equally as important in coming to a decision.
 
sadders said:
So essentially I gave to take their offer or leave voluntarily.

Hi hum.
Click to expand...

No.

I think generally human beings feel vulnerable when they feel have no control over their future.

You can't control other people's decisions of course, but you can control your own.

Were I you, I'd be sitting down with my wife/husband (don't know if you're a man or a woman or even hetero-sexual) and agreeing what the objective is. If you can't afford to be out of work for a period of time then your priority is to keep a job until you find something better - and you need to keep that objective in mind.

Once you've decided what you're prepared to accept and what not to accept then work towards that.

That doesn't mean you have to just take it up the arse. What you do is look into it, find out where you stand and once you know that act reasonably. If it turns out that the NHS can't do that then you fight your corner in a professional and reasonable manner; on the other hand if it turns out the NHS are complying with employment law then assuming you want to keep income until you find something better then swallow your pride and think of your future.

At this point, you don't know where you stand and from your posts you don't seem to have a clear understanding of what you're prepared to accept. Sort those two out first and foremost and then you'll have wrestled back control to an extent and you'll feel less vulnerable - you'll know where you stand and you'll know what you're aiming to achieve it from it.
 
Gaz said:
The important thing is to get advice before doing anything formally, but as others have said it won’t be Tupe as not changing employer. They may be offering same terms for 3 years to try to look like they are being reasonable
Click to expand...

Often, when companies offer to protect a minimum salary for a period of time, it's to avoid a termination of employment due to redundancy, for whatever reason (often political in the public sector especially). It doesn't really change much with regards to the suitability of the alternative offer of employment though. If the new role is significantly different, which you'd reasonably expect a lower grade job to be, then the employee would be acting reasonably and therefore entitled to a redundancy payment if dismissed.
 
Love a redundancy thread me! :D

RBS screwed me and stuck to the line that it was SAE and transferred me to another department however I spent a year fighting them and after the grievance and the appeal was shot down, I found an alternative way of being released. RBS had a policy that employees at risk of redundancy could look to swap with employees that weren't at risk of redundancy should the certain factors mean that the employee at risk was capable of filling the position of the person not at risk. In the end I tracked down employees in another department at risk that wanted to keep a job (a single parent lady that had a child to support) and she had previously done the role I had been moved into. I eventually wangled it that I take her redundancy (although she was part time and would have had a lower payout - I got the correct payout for me) and she take my role.

You could see whether your business are making anyone redundant and see if they have similar policy that allows a swap (I would imagine unlikely) if they are determined to not pay out and put you in in this other role you do not appear to want to take.
 
Boris Bear said:
I’m being made redundant on Friday. Start the new job 3 days later
Click to expand...
I registered with a solicitors to deal with my second redundancy situation within a year (Monarch) as I couldn't be assed taking them on alone (although should be pretty cut and dry given their failure to to discuss/consider/notify of redundancies before they went tits up). If successful, which I hope and imagine it should be, I'll lose a 30% cut of upto 90 days pay.
 
Locke's SAFC said:
Well, you'll probably know that no matter what the HR department says their loyalty is to the organisation and not to you. So, bear that in mind in your discussions.

'Seems to me it all rests on whether or not they are in their rights to offer you, and you alone, a job at a lower grade. I'm not sure whether or not that's discriminatory in some sense or other, but that's the one I would be looking into.

In terms of 'coming from anger', no one likes to feel treated unfairly and no one likes to be backed into a corner where they feel compelled to effectively demote themselves. Either way, just remember that you can't control what other people do and your health and family is far more important than any job. If you get shafted, then life will go on and you'll find a way to rebound as people always do. All you can do is conduct yourself in the right way, including standing up for your rights, and if you get shafted then at least you can say you retained your professionalism (which is important).

In terms of do you have to walk? No you don't. It depends upon what your priorities are - if you have a wife and bairns then it may be best to swallow your pride until something better comes along.

In terms of do you have a case - I think you get the first hour free with a solicitor so you may want to ask him or her the question. Or google it - all of the information will be there for you online.

I've been there where I've felt I haven't had a fair crack of the whip in a job situation, and it really isn't a nice experience. I'd imagine most have so you're certainly not alone.
Click to expand...
That’s what you pay your trade union for
Thompsons will help if unison is your union
 
Some employers will seek to offer voluntary redundancy upfront as an option to recruiting into a suitable alternative. From my understanding of A4C this is one grade below. If not, and if unsuccessful, then redundancy will follow with formal notice served by statutory notice based on age and length of service.

I’d guess the employer has a plan therefore this is will guide their approach.

As said earlier you shouldn’t see this as personal but driven by other motives.

I’d be suprised if they will pay for your legal advice unless it involves some compromise agreement, otherwise redundancy isn’t an agreement completed legally but a simple ending of a contract of employment.
 
So, update.

Today I had my second ‘meeting without predudice’. The first was with a senior manager whose opinion was that the offer was not a suitable alternative. She told me off the record (we get on fairly well and I trust her) that HR feel that I have a case especially as I have been the only person negatively effected. The second meeting was today with a more senior manager who basically told me to take or leave it. The manager from the initial meeting was also present and afterwards told me to look up the Readman case. I have and it appears similar.

I am waiting to speak again to my union.

I spoke to ACAS today who advised moving to the Early consiliation process and the next on to tribunal if needed.

What I really want to know at this point is what is the best way to leave ASAP without ruining any rights I have in this process as this drawn out process is having a negative effect on my mental health.

I would consider seeing the GP to be signed off but I work in 2 different part time NHS jobs (different trusts) and don’t want the other to be effected.
 

Back
Top