I know there many on here who have had/haing this problem.
So made redundant last week, paid till end of month as normal, paid 10 weeks notice plus one week for every full year in employment.
Have 2 weeks to questions why I was made redundant, they made all the youngest people go. Should I be able to find out the criteria under which someone who is 62 kept his job and I did'nt when we do identical tasks. I have 10 years experience in the job, so not a newbie.
The letter said it was for financial reasons, yet they have got rid of the cheapest section of the work force. And kept people people who earn twice as much as me but do the same job. What should I be asking ?
Also whilst here what should I expect to claim now unemployed ?

Your payoff was probably a lot cheaper than the 62 year old, who will also be likely to retire soon, saving them more money. Simples.

No idea, but if they made only the oldest people redundant (unless pure coincidence), I bet they'd be in trouble. Do you have any kind of performance review history etc?

edit – yes and what PP said…if the older guys have more time in, then obviously they're more expensive to lay off.

Sounds very much like age discrimination to me but I don't know anything about this kind of thing 🙂

when you say ot was financial reasons are you sayoing the letter said it was cheaper to get rid of you or the role was made redundnant for financial reasons? If the former they are f@cked but i supect the later.

You can question it and evryone can see what they have done – get rid of those who cost the least but proving it may be ahrd.
You are entitled to see the scores from the redundnancty process – which must be fair and objective.
Has anyone who has been kept got poor performance , bad reviews poor disiplinary /sickness record? May be easier top prove that it was unfair if one remaining expensive candidate is clearly a cr@p employee.

No problems with performance reviews, I can only think they got rid of younger employees (I'm 34, as we are more likley to find a new job. Than a 45 year old with 25 years experience.

when in a redundancy situation the employer should make it clear the criteria on which you will be scored for seeing who is to be made redundant.
They generally use things like attendance, disciplinaries, skills, future suitability. Each of those should make up a percentage of your score (future suitability is generally the highest as that's the one that's difficult to argue against).
Ask to see your score. Get some professional help if you decide to appeal.

tbh it's fairer to get rid of they young. You're much more employable than someone reaching retirement.
They'll probably get offerred early returement soon too.

So do they have to show me my score if ask. Future suitability I had'nt thought about that, I have a degree which is more than all the other left who only have O levels being 40+

I'm not sure the 62 year old would be that much more expensive to get rid of over you per se

IIRC after the age of 60, you lose 20% of your redundancy payout per year so a 62 yr old would lose 40%

All depends on lengths of service for each of you though & how old you are

yes they have to show you the score if you appeal.

Your degree may make you more intelligent, but doesn't make you more useful to the company.

Think along the lines of key skills within the company, does someone else have experience in other departments or can they do a particular job that no one else can.
I don't know what you do, but for example, if you are a bin man with a degree, but no HGV ticket and old Bob can barely write his own name, but has been driving bin lorries for 50 years. which of you has more future suitability?

You cannot be made redundant on how much it costs, or whether or not you will be able to find another job easier than somebody else.

The Southern Yeti – Member
tbh it's fairer to get rid of they young. You're much more employable than someone reaching retirement.
They'll probably get offerred early returement soon too.

Nonesense.
As muggo says they need an OBJECTIVE scoring sytem – yeti that is subjective and contentious unless you have some sort of psychic predictive ability. I would pay good money to see you try and prove that to a court as objectively true.
You should be told before how they are scoring and you should be able to see your score and others [perhaps with names removed for others – you can then challenge them directly as to why x candidate scored more than you on a criteria. As the scoring is objective they need to be able to demonstrate this as OBJECTIVELY true. If they got rid of all the young and cheaper people it is unlikely that this will be the case for you all. Hence why you need to see scores compare and challenge. See Union rep or solictor for advice.

you really should have had some consultation on how they were going to score you prior to them actually doing it. They may well have made it along the lines of,
Length of service = 80%
Attendance = 10%
Key skills = 5%
disciplinaries = 5%
Hence the fact all the older longer serving people have stayed and the younger people are going. No use to you now, but you would have needed to argue the point with them in the consultation period if you felt the scoring process was unfair.

Consultation finishes at the end of the month, I am on full pay to the end the month fully employed but redundancy will kick in then. Just not required in the office as ' time will be better spent looking for new employment'. So need to know what to ask when I go in for consultation next week.

They have made you redundant before the consultation period has finished? speak to a pro ASAP.

I think length of service is not a fair criteria as it does not necessarily relate to your ability to do the job. It is objective but is it fair? It has been found to be ok in courts [limited question iirc rolls royce v Unite]but has yet to be challenged in an employment tribunal under age discrimination law. It could well be found to be indirect discrimination as clearly the older you are the more of this you will have but we await case law on this

GET ALL THIS IN WRITING AND TAKE THEM TO THE CLEANERS – how can they make you redundant whislt consulting with you?

Quote
You have been provisionally selected for redundancy, we will be available to consult directly with you before confirming any redundancy. Whilst the consultation takes place you are not required to carry on working.

Been through a similar thing myself. I was made redundant from a job where i had a great deal more skills than the late-50s guy i was working with. But on comparing notes, he'd been there for years, was on a completely different contract and would have cost a lot more to pay off (I was embarrassingly cheap).

The 'consultation process' we went through was a farce. They clearly selected the criteria to produce a specific result.

They awarded points for certain skills etc. He scored more than me (surprise surprise!). Only on adding our scores up, he didn't. They'd put the wrong scores in. Didn't make any difference. I still lost my job. He didn't.

I get the feeling you may be able to go through a similar 'consultancy exercise'

Good luck!

Be firm in your consultancy meeting, and make them squirm with 'difficult' questions (asked with a smile).

Object, to get more cash, as its highly unlikely they'll give you your job back.

Also how much is Gross and how much Net, as you want to be paying little or no cash. Also holidays etc paid in full. Are there any bonuses due in the future, get a percentage of that.

Companies are expert at doing this, getting rid of the people they want to get rid of (or who are cheapest to get rid of) and doing it all *just* within the letter of the law – HR folk are paid lots of money to know how to do things like this and most staff don't know the process fully enough/don't have enough time to consult a lawyer to come back with any reprisals.

Talk to an employment law specialist (maybe via CAB) as a matter of urgency.

In any meeting with the company, you are entitled to take in a representative (ie work colleague etc, they can't answer questions on your behalf but they can ask questions), you can make notes and you can ask them for copies of notes they made, the point scores and the criteria used to judge those scores.

In your time off try and think up all the questions you want answered at the meeting…

Companies are expert at doing this, getting rid of the people they want to get rid of

Not all of them. I know of one company who got something pretty minor wrong in the process. The redundant employees took legal action and won. They are now bullet-proof.

Talk to an employment law specialist

NOW!

In any meeting with the company, you are entitled to take in a representative (ie work colleague etc, they can't answer questions on your behalf but they can ask questions), you can make notes and you can ask them for copies of notes they made, the point scores and the criteria used to judge those scores.

Do this. It will be helpful in many ways…

I was in this situation not long ago – gardening leave while they go through the charade of a 'consultation process'. They're just jumping through hoops ticking boxes etc. to make sure you can't take them to tribunal, even though in reality they've made their mind up. As others say, ask awkward questions about how you were chosen and they have to respond in writing. You have three months from the point of being made formally redundant to take them to tribunal if you feel they have broken any rules; before then you may manage to ask a question that worries them enough for them to offer you more money if you sign a waiver that you won't see a lawyer later… (didn't work for me, but it did for an ex-coleague of mine).

Once formally redundant, note that you can sign on for Job Seeker's Allowance, your redundancy pay and pay in lieu of notice period doesn't matter. I thought I had to wait for the notice period to finish, you don't. Mind you, it's only £65 a week which won't keep the wolf from the door for long.

You didn't mention your age, if you are 41 or over they should give you 1.5 times your weekly salary for every year of employment for the redundancy pay. I'm 40, it's almost as though they chose me to save a couple of grand redundancy pay, but of course they can't base their decision on age, so that can't say that that's the reason even if it is. If they do say anything like that you should probably get some advice straight away.