Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
Sorry if this a bit rambling would be good to get some views esp. from anyone with knowledge or similar experience!
Wife has been informed she will be made redundant after almost 19 years with the company. We knew these were coming and there is certainly a justified business rationale..
However my wife feels she has been stitched up it appears that the selection criteria have been amended during the process to allow for a longer serving full time working male colleague to be mapped into her role. Wife works part time and feels she has been discriminated against because this and length of service make it cheaper to get rid of her.
Her main point of appeals are:
The communicated performance criteria for selection were 2 years appraisals, she was informed in the meeting they had used 3 and the criteria were weighted towards this element, when it had previously been communicated there was no weighting. Wife was a very high achiever in 2 out of those 3 years, 3 years back there was an issue however where she was only awarded average after some difficulties with a previous manager. So it feels like the criteria have been stretched to allow the decision.
The colleague taking the role has no experience of about 70% of the job description and it was written in the main from the job my wife was recruited onto. (the colleague is shocked that he was placed in this role above my wife and told her as much, and has [u]no[/u] experience of dealing with the operation he will now be supporting)
There are a few other points including feedback she was given on her performance at the meeting that she had never previously received.
She is going to appeal internally as a first stage and the employee rep in the process will support this, but we are potentially looking at getting a lawyer involved so I was wondering if anyone had any experience of an employment tribunal or challenging these decisions..
Her aim is not to retain her job, but to leave with a bigger chunk of cash.
Union support is not an option btw, she is too senior to be a member.
A close confident internally has told her she has basically no chance of success at tribunal and I fear that cases found in favour of the employee make this path almost not worth bothering with.
In that case I'd be looking for a compromise agreement. She leaves with a chunk of cash and agrees not to sue for anything. They should be happy with this as it'll be less admin and cheaper overall than most other options. Constructive dismissal is probably not the one to threaten with as payouts are generally very small. Questioning whether it is sexual discrimination might be a better approach. Basically the compromise agreement is less stress and hassle for both parties, you just need to come up with a figure that both parties agree on. They might be willing to do a reasonable compromise agreement just to not have to go through all the hoops of a redundancy.Her aim is not to retain her job, but to leave with a bigger chunk of cash
I think there are 2 issues here:
1, Have they made the right decision?
2, Have they followed process
point no1 is the one which gets emotions involved and is really difficult to deal with as a result. You (she) have mu sympathies
Point number 2 is the one that gives you the best chance of winning any disagreement.
They need to follow through on the process they have outlined, any variation would look really bad for them.........so the point you made about the process announcing 2 years appraisals, then using 3 is quite important - are there other examples where the actual process varied from the announced process?
(IANAL but have managed a few people and had a couple of redundancy situations to deal with)
Best of Luck!
Reading between the lines it seems the company want your wife gone and redunancy is the only way they can do it. Legally they can't make her redundant and then put some else into that role, the role is redundant, not the person. But we all know that never happens.
If all you want is more money, not to keep the job, and frankly who wants to work for a company that would treat you this way, is to be blatant about it, " how much to go away quietly and not make a fuss or I'll see you at tribunal?"
The other side of that is they end up paying her statutory redundancy pay which will be a lot less than what they'll offer if she's very senior.
If they are looking to put someone else in her role then that doesn't sound like redundancy to me. It's the job not the person that goes.
The role is a technically new one, they have that covered by slight changes to the Job Description. Its the process that doesn't appear to have been followed correctly that is being challenged.
The employee rep and HR have come back to her today to say 2 years appraisals should have been used and the feedback she has been given is its 3, so there has been a very clear deviation from the process at least in her instance for that measure.
[i]Her aim is not to retain her job, but to leave with a bigger chunk of cash.[/i]
This is the only sentence that matters.
How much is she getting and does she think that she can get more - with minimum cost/hassle? Also does she want to leave for another job (that she's got lined up), or take a holiday etc.
b r.. The redundancy terms are fairly good she will be taxed on it put it that way. We don't know if or how she could get more or if it would cost or be a hassle or worth the risk... I guess thats the crux of what I am asking.
I think the best way is to discuss the irregularities with HR on the process for selection
Then jump on any offering of a compromise agreement that is made.
As part of the process they will pay for a solicitor to help her. A suitable compromise agreement should be arrived at and hopefully good payout.
[i]b r.. The redundancy terms are fairly good she will be taxed on it put it that way. We don't know if or how she could get more or if it would cost or be a hassle or worth the risk... I guess thats the crux of what I am asking. [/i]
How it's taxed will depend on how it's paid and her contract, she should Google the options plus talk with HR.
FWIW I wouldn't be bothering looking at legal options, but of course not let them know that 😉
The redundancy terms are fairly good she will be taxed on it put it that way. We don't know if or how she could get more or if it would cost or be a hassle or worth the risk... I guess thats the crux of what I am asking
If shes going to get more than £30k then its probably not worth the hassle/agro of going down that route.
Take the money and run, be polite, leave with her head held high, negotiate an early release and enjoy the summer.
Being a pain in the backside will just make the next few months difficult and could cause issues when going for other jobs in the future.
If she's getting enough redundancy to incurr tax on it (not including any notice period) she's already done very well. The most you can hope for really is a compromise agreement so she can get her notice money tax free and it'll save her employer a bit in NI as well. More often or not it's statutory which if you're well paid is derisory.
If in Edinburgh area I can recommend a good employment solicitor. Won't be cheap though.
When I got made redundant (and it really was the role, not me) they paid for solicitor - I went straight to the one I'd recommend, who basically said, you've done pretty well, take the cash. FWIW I was also on about 19 years service, the buggers capped the payout at 12 years (i.e. one year's salary)... Good/Bad it was. as far as I knew, I was the only employee that applied to 🙁
as we dont know the 3 sides of this story, lets use the company side, they need to cut jobs, save money, change ways of working etc, as do most companies, so they look for people to get rid of, and thats what theyll do, thats why theyre management, and those staff lined up fr the letter, will always feel agrieved and look for answers that arent there based on facts and made of excuses.
the old adage if your face dont fit your not welcome always comes into play.Thats how companies have always worked and always will
Project. Yeah I agree with you in the main, I know there is just the one side here and its difficult to be objective. The test I apply is if I were in a pool with colleagues would my own redundancy be fair and unequivocally it would because I am an average performer with a non business critical role. We work for the same parent co. and I expect to be at risk later in the year FWIW as the company is shedding 6,000 roles, about 40% of management support type roles we reckon... So She, I and her close colleagues feel that there has been some discrimination. And if there has then it should be addressed..
As far as I recall, unfair dismissal is capped whereas sexual discrimination is not so if you can potentially build a case for the latter their downside is much much bigger.
Exactly same thing happened to me a few years back. They wanted a younger team and I was part of the old guard so my new boss wanted rid. In order to do this they moved the goal posts far enough back so my sales figures (which were top draw recently) incorporated a blip where two teams were merged/clients shifted etc etc and looked far worse than they should have done. TBH I could have made a big fuss but for what?
It might have got me a bit more cash (I too was in the happy position of being taxed on my pay out) but would have marked my card, especially if legals were used. Also i suspect they had upped my payout already to ensure I went 'Hmmmmmmm Okaaay' when i saw it and that is in jepoardy (goes into escrow) if legal action is broght.
So I took the low stress exit stratagy and walked that week, had the summer off and then took stock. Life is too short to be messing around unless you feel you've been truly shafted.
[i]So She, I and her close colleagues feel that there has been some discrimination. And if there has then it should be addressed[/i]
A bit of advice from someone who's been on both sides on more than one occasion, "principles don't pay the bills".
Yes, play hardball to get the most you can get, and in the most efficient way. But not so hard that they remove the offer and replace it with a worse one.
IANAL but it's my understanding that constructive dismissal will award loss of earnings considering the time it would take to find another similar role. In that case, it might be tricky to get anything, because she is already on good redundancy terms with a reasonably large payout.
It sounds a familiar situtation. In my old company, they kept all the people who'd been there 20+ years (who wanted to volunteer for redundancy) and made all the younger staff redundant (cheaper).
In other words, they kept the people who wanted to leave, and got rid of the people who wanted to stay. It saved money, but they ended up with a very unmotivated workforce.