FabSwingers.com > Forums > Swinging Support and Advice > Any employment law specialists
Any employment law specialists
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Am being told I have option to relocate 30 miles away or take voluntary redundancy. If I decline redundancy at this stage I will be put on a 4 week trial period at new premises.
This is the part I am very worried about in the official letter I have received :
If at end of trial period either you or the company decided that new location was not a reasonable distance to travel then your employment would finish at end of trial period unless we are able to find an alternative position for you. You would be entitled to statutory redundancy payment in the event your position is made redundant or if the trial does not work.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Relocation leading to unfair dismissal/redundancy"
The offer of redundancy if you don't want to relocate is perfectly normal. You might not think it;s fair but it;s not unfair dismissal |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Am being told I have option to relocate 30 miles away or take voluntary redundancy. If I decline redundancy at this stage I will be put on a 4 week trial period at new premises.
This is the part I am very worried about in the official letter I have received :
If at end of trial period either you or the company decided that new location was not a reasonable distance to travel then your employment would finish at end of trial period unless we are able to find an alternative position for you. You would be entitled to statutory redundancy payment in the event your position is made redundant or if the trial does not work.
"
So you can take redundancy now, or try the commute and still take the redundancy after a month if it;s too much? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Sought of pre assuming.. the company are relocating to a different for what ever reason (sometimes its to a new location miles away) to cut down on work force without having to pay redundancy monies.
The company are probably saying "we are not making you redundant" your job is still there but 200 miles away"
My friend went through a similar scenario and could not complain a penny as she was not willing to relocate and resigned
Sorry to be bearer of bad news if this is the case |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
You would be entitled to statutory redundancy payment in the event your position is made redundant or if the trial does not work.
This is what I have issue with. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Am being told I have option to relocate 30 miles away or take voluntary redundancy. If I decline redundancy at this stage I will be put on a 4 week trial period at new premises.
This is the part I am very worried about in the official letter I have received :
If at end of trial period either you or the company decided that new location was not a reasonable distance to travel then your employment would finish at end of trial period unless we are able to find an alternative position for you. You would be entitled to statutory redundancy payment in the event your position is made redundant or if the trial does not work.
So you can take redundancy now, or try the commute and still take the redundancy after a month if it;s too much?"
Yes that's correct. I'm happy to relocate but they are mentioning my position being made redundant. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sought of pre assuming.. the company are relocating to a different for what ever reason (sometimes its to a new location miles away) to cut down on work force without having to pay redundancy monies.
The company are probably saying "we are not making you redundant" your job is still there but 200 miles away"
My friend went through a similar scenario and could not complain a penny as she was not willing to relocate and resigned
Sorry to be bearer of bad news if this is the case"
Ok sorry jumped the gun here a bit  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Sought of pre assuming.. the company are relocating to a different for what ever reason (sometimes its to a new location miles away) to cut down on work force without having to pay redundancy monies.
The company are probably saying "we are not making you redundant" your job is still there but 200 miles away"
My friend went through a similar scenario and could not complain a penny as she was not willing to relocate and resigned
Sorry to be bearer of bad news if this is the case
Ok sorry jumped the gun here a bit "
Thanks for replying. Sorry I'm not explaining it very well. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"You would be entitled to statutory redundancy payment in the event your position is made redundant or if the trial does not work.
This is what I have issue with."
Why? Surely that is preferable to being told that if you take the new position you can;t change your maind and take redundancy if you feel the travelling is too much.
It all seems pretty fair to me. What do your union think?
And assuming that this effects far more people than just you and the terms are the same for all of them it seems totally paranoid to suggest that they 'want to get rid of you' |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eavenNhellCouple
over a year ago
carrbrook stalybridge |
so basickly they are moving your job 30 miles away you can either take redundancy now2 or have a trial run at the new place if it doesent work out eitherway at the new place after the trial you can take redundancy or they can make you redundant the last part is your main worry |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"so basickly they are moving your job 30 miles away you can either take redundancy now2 or have a trial run at the new place if it doesent work out eitherway at the new place after the trial you can take redundancy or they can make you redundant the last part is your main worry "
Yes spot on! The last part is what's worrying me. It makes it sound like they're going to make me redundant regardless? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"You would be entitled to statutory redundancy payment in the event your position is made redundant or if the trial does not work.
This is what I have issue with.
Why? Surely that is preferable to being told that if you take the new position you can;t change your maind and take redundancy if you feel the travelling is too much.
It all seems pretty fair to me. What do your union think?
And assuming that this effects far more people than just you and the terms are the same for all of them it seems totally paranoid to suggest that they 'want to get rid of you'"
No only 5 people out of 12 were offered redundancy.
Im not with a union.
I'm happy to relocate. Why would my position not be available? ?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ynecplCouple
over a year ago
Newcastle upon Tyne |
All seems fair, it is standard practice they have offered you a choice take redundancy now or take the relocation to the ne site, however until you actually start the commute neither yourself or your employer know if it is practical and feasible for you to make the journey every day so in 4 weeks they will review the situation.
It is something I have offered employees in the past. If they wanted rid of you then you would have gone in the initial redundancy phase and not have been offered the job as you have already said the selection pool was 12 and 5 people were selected my guess is they did not volunteer. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"All seems fair, it is standard practice they have offered you a choice take redundancy now or take the relocation to the ne site, however until you actually start the commute neither yourself or your employer know if it is practical and feasible for you to make the journey every day so in 4 weeks they will review the situation.
It is something I have offered employees in the past. If they wanted rid of you then you would have gone in the initial redundancy phase and not have been offered the job as you have already said the selection pool was 12 and 5 people were selected my guess is they did not volunteer."
Im one of the 5. None of us volunteered.
Surely this is two separate issues? Redundancy and relocation . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Voluntary redundancy is usually at a more enhanced rate than statutory redundancy which is usually one weeks pay per year of service. Might be something to consider depending on the figures. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Have they offered you a re-location package. For example, the difference in mileage/travel costs from home to your new place of work. This usually offered for a fixed term following a move e.g. one/two years. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ynecplCouple
over a year ago
Newcastle upon Tyne |
Sorry misread you original post.
So are the remaining 7 staying at the original site.
The employer has a duty to try and avoid a redundancy situation and find alternative employment of similar status, pay and type of work. This can include alternative locations but this has to be feasible to both parties.
For example if they offered you a job matching all the above in the building next door and you refused then you would be effectively resigning and not be entitled to any redundancy pay, however in this instance the location is 30 miles away so they have offered you the option with no loss of redundancy payment if it does not work out.
Providing they had a fair redundancy selection process you have two choices take redundancy now or try and commute.
Without knowing your exact employment history and relationship with the company can't make a judgement on whether the company want rid of you but if I was in their position and wanted rid of you I would not have offered you alternative employment 30 miles away they are not saving any money by employing you for another 4 weeks. You should be compensated for the costs of travel to the new location everyday. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Have they offered you a re-location package. For example, the difference in mileage/travel costs from home to your new place of work. This usually offered for a fixed term following a move e.g. one/two years."
Fuel costs have been offered for 6 months |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Sorry misread you original post.
So are the remaining 7 staying at the original site.
The employer has a duty to try and avoid a redundancy situation and find alternative employment of similar status, pay and type of work. This can include alternative locations but this has to be feasible to both parties.
For example if they offered you a job matching all the above in the building next door and you refused then you would be effectively resigning and not be entitled to any redundancy pay, however in this instance the location is 30 miles away so they have offered you the option with no loss of redundancy payment if it does not work out.
Providing they had a fair redundancy selection process you have two choices take redundancy now or try and commute.
Without knowing your exact employment history and relationship with the company can't make a judgement on whether the company want rid of you but if I was in their position and wanted rid of you I would not have offered you alternative employment 30 miles away they are not saving any money by employing you for another 4 weeks. You should be compensated for the costs of travel to the new location everyday."
I need to sign off. Would you mind if I pmd you tomorrow? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"You would be entitled to statutory redundancy payment in the event your position is made redundant or if the trial does not work.
This is what I have issue with.
Why? Surely that is preferable to being told that if you take the new position you can;t change your maind and take redundancy if you feel the travelling is too much.
It all seems pretty fair to me. What do your union think?
And assuming that this effects far more people than just you and the terms are the same for all of them it seems totally paranoid to suggest that they 'want to get rid of you'
No only 5 people out of 12 were offered redundancy.
Im not with a union.
I'm happy to relocate. Why would my position not be available? ??"
What has your Union advised? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
n the information that you have provided the company have not said that your position is being made redundant. They seem to have said that you are required to move and if it doesn't work out that they will give you redundancy pay, which could be the equivalent of redundancy pay, hoping that you will go quietly, whilst being very careful with words and blurring the issue. You need some good legal advice, rather than 'bar room experts' (no disrespect intended to the good people of Fab trying to help out). Some Solicitors will give a free initial consultation or one with a limited fixed fee, so my advice would be to find one who deals with employment law and take their advice. Hope it works out well for you |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"n the information that you have provided the company have not said that your position is being made redundant. They seem to have said that you are required to move and if it doesn't work out that they will give you redundancy pay, which could be the equivalent of redundancy pay, hoping that you will go quietly, whilst being very careful with words and blurring the issue. You need some good legal advice, rather than 'bar room experts' (no disrespect intended to the good people of Fab trying to help out). Some Solicitors will give a free initial consultation or one with a limited fixed fee, so my advice would be to find one who deals with employment law and take their advice. Hope it works out well for you"
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eavenNhellCouple
over a year ago
carrbrook stalybridge |
"You would be entitled to statutory redundancy payment in the event your position is made redundant or if the trial does not work.
This is what I have issue with.
Why? Surely that is preferable to being told that if you take the new position you can;t change your maind and take redundancy if you feel the travelling is too much.
It all seems pretty fair to me. What do your union think?
And assuming that this effects far more people than just you and the terms are the same for all of them it seems totally paranoid to suggest that they 'want to get rid of you'
No only 5 people out of 12 were offered redundancy.
Im not with a union.
I'm happy to relocate. Why would my position not be available? ??
What has your Union advised?"
hes not in a in union suspects like a lot of others in his situation that is something he regrets |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"You would be entitled to statutory redundancy payment in the event your position is made redundant or if the trial does not work.
This is what I have issue with.
Why? Surely that is preferable to being told that if you take the new position you can;t change your maind and take redundancy if you feel the travelling is too much.
It all seems pretty fair to me. What do your union think?
And assuming that this effects far more people than just you and the terms are the same for all of them it seems totally paranoid to suggest that they 'want to get rid of you'
No only 5 people out of 12 were offered redundancy.
Im not with a union.
I'm happy to relocate. Why would my position not be available? ??
What has your Union advised?hes not in a in union suspects like a lot of others in his situation that is something he regrets "
Doubt it, there's nothing they could do to change the situation.
I haven't read anything that would worry me OP. When they write to you, they have to explain all the implications of your decision. It's just standard practice, I'd be amazed if you and the other 4/5 didn't get identical letters. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I'm not with a union.
Trial period is presumably if I find the travelling too much.
My main concern is the redundancy issue after 4 weeks trial.
I was under the impression you can't make a person redundant it has to be the role. My role would still exist though because of the job I do nobody else can do it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm not with a union.
Trial period is presumably if I find the travelling too much.
My main concern is the redundancy issue after 4 weeks trial.
I was under the impression you can't make a person redundant it has to be the role. My role would still exist though because of the job I do nobody else can do it"
That is correct. I think you are reading too much into what is standard legal blurb. I would simply ask the other 4 or 5 people if their letters had that statement in. If theirs did then you have nothing to worry about. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Asked my sister who is in personnel at her company.
Is your current site closing down or downsizing? In which case redundancies are inevitable.
They are offering you another post (presumably on same terms?). This is positive....they want to keep you!
30 miles these days is not considered far. They have stated if either party thinks it is then redundancy is another OPTION. Up to you to decide if it is or not. They could only comment if you would be regularly late during the "trial" period.
What are the roads like? What would be your travelling time compared to now? Do they offer flexitime?
She cannot see a case for constructive dismissal unless they are singling you out specifically. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I'm not with a union.
Trial period is presumably if I find the travelling too much.
My main concern is the redundancy issue after 4 weeks trial.
I was under the impression you can't make a person redundant it has to be the role. My role would still exist though because of the job I do nobody else can do it
That is correct. I think you are reading too much into what is standard legal blurb. I would simply ask the other 4 or 5 people if their letters had that statement in. If theirs did then you have nothing to worry about. "
Yes I believe those two paragraphs were in their letters. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Asked my sister who is in personnel at her company.
Is your current site closing down or downsizing? In which case redundancies are inevitable.
They are offering you another post (presumably on same terms?). This is positive....they want to keep you!
30 miles these days is not considered far. They have stated if either party thinks it is then redundancy is another OPTION. Up to you to decide if it is or not. They could only comment if you would be regularly late during the "trial" period.
What are the roads like? What would be your travelling time compared to now? Do they offer flexitime?
She cannot see a case for constructive dismissal unless they are singling you out specifically."
I asked outright if I still had a job (this is prior to receiving that letter). The exact response was: we have no plans to change your job role.
Hmmmm this doesn't fill me with confidence.
Same hours same role. Adding two hours travel onto my journey a day.
The company overall has made a loss so far this year so could understand downsizing admin as there's lots at the new place but my role had only me within the company that can do it
Like I say the concern is redundancy. I really think I need to see an expert in this field though.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Asked my sister who is in personnel at her company.
Is your current site closing down or downsizing? In which case redundancies are inevitable.
They are offering you another post (presumably on same terms?). This is positive....they want to keep you!
30 miles these days is not considered far. They have stated if either party thinks it is then redundancy is another OPTION. Up to you to decide if it is or not. They could only comment if you would be regularly late during the "trial" period.
What are the roads like? What would be your travelling time compared to now? Do they offer flexitime?
She cannot see a case for constructive dismissal unless they are singling you out specifically.
I asked outright if I still had a job (this is prior to receiving that letter). The exact response was: we have no plans to change your job role.
Hmmmm this doesn't fill me with confidence.
Same hours same role. Adding two hours travel onto my journey a day.
The company overall has made a loss so far this year so could understand downsizing admin as there's lots at the new place but my role had only me within the company that can do it
Like I say the concern is redundancy. I really think I need to see an expert in this field though.
"
Who did you ask? If you ask HR then that's the kind of computerised response I'd expect from those process monkeys. I'd expect more from a line manager. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Asked my sister who is in personnel at her company.
Is your current site closing down or downsizing? In which case redundancies are inevitable.
They are offering you another post (presumably on same terms?). This is positive....they want to keep you!
30 miles these days is not considered far. They have stated if either party thinks it is then redundancy is another OPTION. Up to you to decide if it is or not. They could only comment if you would be regularly late during the "trial" period.
What are the roads like? What would be your travelling time compared to now? Do they offer flexitime?
She cannot see a case for constructive dismissal unless they are singling you out specifically.
I asked outright if I still had a job (this is prior to receiving that letter). The exact response was: we have no plans to change your job role.
Hmmmm this doesn't fill me with confidence.
Same hours same role. Adding two hours travel onto my journey a day.
The company overall has made a loss so far this year so could understand downsizing admin as there's lots at the new place but my role had only me within the company that can do it
Like I say the concern is redundancy. I really think I need to see an expert in this field though.
Who did you ask? If you ask HR then that's the kind of computerised response I'd expect from those process monkeys. I'd expect more from a line manager. "
My FD who I had the one to one with prior to receiving the letter |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Regardless of what has caused the issue the questions that would need to be asked are?
Has the company made all reasonable attempts to keep you?
Was the alternative option offered a reasonable one given the options available to them?
Chances are if they have followed procedure then they will be protected against a CD claim.
If it's genuinely a concern find a no-win-no-fee employment solicitor and see what they say. You'll have an answer on viability of a claim very quickly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Asked my sister who is in personnel at her company.
Is your current site closing down or downsizing? In which case redundancies are inevitable.
They are offering you another post (presumably on same terms?). This is positive....they want to keep you!
30 miles these days is not considered far. They have stated if either party thinks it is then redundancy is another OPTION. Up to you to decide if it is or not. They could only comment if you would be regularly late during the "trial" period.
What are the roads like? What would be your travelling time compared to now? Do they offer flexitime?
She cannot see a case for constructive dismissal unless they are singling you out specifically.
I asked outright if I still had a job (this is prior to receiving that letter). The exact response was: we have no plans to change your job role.
Hmmmm this doesn't fill me with confidence.
Same hours same role. Adding two hours travel onto my journey a day.
The company overall has made a loss so far this year so could understand downsizing admin as there's lots at the new place but my role had only me within the company that can do it
Like I say the concern is redundancy. I really think I need to see an expert in this field though.
Who did you ask? If you ask HR then that's the kind of computerised response I'd expect from those process monkeys. I'd expect more from a line manager.
My FD who I had the one to one with prior to receiving the letter"
In that scenario their only goal is to guide you through the process without saying anything that would let you sue them. I wouldn't read too much into it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Am being told I have option to relocate 30 miles away or take voluntary redundancy. If I decline redundancy at this stage I will be put on a 4 week trial period at new premises.
This is the part I am very worried about in the official letter I have received :
If at end of trial period either you or the company decided that new location was not a reasonable distance to travel then your employment would finish at end of trial period unless we are able to find an alternative position for you. You would be entitled to statutory redundancy payment in the event your position is made redundant or if the trial does not work.
"
Ring acas or speak to a union rep .....depends what is also stated in your contract as you may have clauses in there with regards to relocating |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Much depends on some unknown information.
1. Has or will your job role change?
2. Will you be given a new contract of employment?
3. Have you been involved in any disciplinary procedure against you and had disciplinary action taken against you, the terms of which are currently unspent? (I.e. Verbal warning, written warning or final warning? Or had probation period extended? Which you are still currently under?)
4. Have you been employed by them for less than 24 months?
Much of what you have explained that they have said to you is perfectly legal and legitimate, with the exception of the four week trial period to which they may decide not to continue your employment.
To me, and I believe in the eyes of employment law, this would be considered as a new probationary period, and only legal if you have answered yes to any of the above points.
It's perfectly fair and reasonable to allow you a four week trial period to make a decision, but unfair and illegal for them to make a decision on that, if they were unhappy with your performance they would have to follow normal disciplinary procedures or performance management, or follow the legal route of redundancy.
All in all though I wouldn't worry, it doesn't sound dodgy or underhand, however if after 4 weeks trial THEY say they don't think it's working, remember what I've wrote above and seek legal advice immediately. X |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Much depends on some unknown information.
1. Has or will your job role change?
2. Will you be given a new contract of employment?
3. Have you been involved in any disciplinary procedure against you and had disciplinary action taken against you, the terms of which are currently unspent? (I.e. Verbal warning, written warning or final warning? Or had probation period extended? Which you are still currently under?)
4. Have you been employed by them for less than 24 months?
Much of what you have explained that they have said to you is perfectly legal and legitimate, with the exception of the four week trial period to which they may decide not to continue your employment.
To me, and I believe in the eyes of employment law, this would be considered as a new probationary period, and only legal if you have answered yes to any of the above points.
It's perfectly fair and reasonable to allow you a four week trial period to make a decision, but unfair and illegal for them to make a decision on that, if they were unhappy with your performance they would have to follow normal disciplinary procedures or performance management, or follow the legal route of redundancy.
All in all though I wouldn't worry, it doesn't sound dodgy or underhand, however if after 4 weeks trial THEY say they don't think it's working, remember what I've wrote above and seek legal advice immediately. X"
Hi
In answer to your questions the answer is no to all of them.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"If you are in a union get them involved bosses hate them it makes them squirm "
I'm not in a union
I will be seeking legal advice tomorrow
Thank you to everyone who has commented and advised on here and by pm. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"If you are in a union get them involved bosses hate them it makes them squirm
Always good to have an antagonistic relationship with management  "
Lol I'm sure it does |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
RE Legal advice....
Having spent £1100 on employment law advice within the last few months (they settled out of court btw) and this being with a newly qualified solicitor, be very careful how much mental and time space you give to going down this route.
Employment cases are very difficult and employers ensure that their contracts these days are pretty water tight.
It's probably too difficult for any of us to give advice without seeing your contract etc but with you employed for over two years you have scope for a tribunal should you wish to take that route but my guess would be to not worry and ensure that your exact contract remains and that you do not sign anything to the effect of a 4 week trial period.
At the end of the day, 30 miles away is no real commute these days and it may well have a clause in your contract about carrying out work at any location deemed fit by the business....and then should you decide to not work at that new location, they can effectively sack you for breach of contract. Check whether the business location is listed in your contract.
Also, is the business being taken over or simply relocating. It would be TUPE'd over then and thats a different thing altogether.
Should you decide to go in to the solicitors, take your letter and contract and any communication you have and be sure that any further communication with your manager etc is done via email.
Rather embarrassingly, I have a masters in human resource management....so could front my shoddy employers and basically say you're taking the piss....whilst having the balls to stand up to them. It's stressful, exhausting and frustrating and as you have been employed for some time, you are likely to find another job elsewhere and within the location of your choice and perhaps the organisation would support you in a move on process.
That's all....except to say GOOD LUCK! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Get yourself to a free clinic with a local firm of Solicitors taking all the papers with you. Employment law isn't the most straight forward area of law but I am too rusty.
Not read all the thread so I assume you're not in a union - you need 13 weeks membership to be properly represented by them. Do you have any legal cover on your home insurance?
If you do end up seeking legal advice, a solicitor will charge @£120 per hour. Sometimes it's cheaper to go straight to a Barrister for a set fee. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Get yourself to a free clinic with a local firm of Solicitors taking all the papers with you. Employment law isn't the most straight forward area of law but I am too rusty.
Not read all the thread so I assume you're not in a union - you need 13 weeks membership to be properly represented by them. Do you have any legal cover on your home insurance?
If you do end up seeking legal advice, a solicitor will charge @£120 per hour. Sometimes it's cheaper to go straight to a Barrister for a set fee. "
What exactly are you going to ask them? Unless the company has made a mistake in the letter (very unlikely) then there's nothing really to say. No solicitor is going to speculate about her job security, paid or otherwise.
All the relevant legal issues have already been identified earlier on the thread and frankly there's nothing the OP can do other than wait and see what happens. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I am happy to relocate. That's not the issue.
Why would they talk about making me redundant if I'm happy to travel?"
Pretty much standard policy for any company and fully in line with the law.
You are looking for a issue that does not exist I think. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I am happy to relocate. That's not the issue.
Why would they talk about making me redundant if I'm happy to travel?Pretty much standard policy for any company and fully in line with the law.
You are looking for a issue that does not exist I think. "
Changing your location is fundamentally changing your role. Legally they HAVE to offer you a trial period - they're being fair to you. If it doesn't work out for you with the extra travel, they'll make you redundant based on location. What's unfair about that?! The role is needed where it's needed, it would be unfair to force you to do it if it didn't work for you.
I suspect we've not heard the whole story - there must have been a selection process, reason for moving the roles etc.
*Her* (HR 'process monkey' ) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I am happy to relocate. That's not the issue.
Why would they talk about making me redundant if I'm happy to travel?Pretty much standard policy for any company and fully in line with the law.
You are looking for a issue that does not exist I think.
Changing your location is fundamentally changing your role. Legally they HAVE to offer you a trial period - they're being fair to you. If it doesn't work out for you with the extra travel, they'll make you redundant based on location. What's unfair about that?! The role is needed where it's needed, it would be unfair to force you to do it if it didn't work for you.
I suspect we've not heard the whole story - there must have been a selection process, reason for moving the roles etc.
*Her* (HR 'process monkey' ) "
From what I read, the thing he doesn't like is if OP takes the trial period and it doesn't work out, he will only be eligible for statutory redundancy, rather than the full redundancy on offer at the moment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oodmessMan
over a year ago
yumsville |
It seems odd that an admin function can be done in one location but not another, when answering calls, emails or collating data can be done from anywhere. It seems highly unreasonable for your employer to ask you to commute 30miles for your role and seems constructive to me though they are being very good at appearing not in offering fuel costs - but in rush hour this would be a 2hr journey? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
As an employer myself (9 staff) I would not want my business expansion plans to be put on hold because staff won't move with me, and you would be wasting your time seeking legal advice... The choice is simple, take the job or take redundancy |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oodmessMan
over a year ago
yumsville |
"As an employer myself (9 staff) I would not want my business expansion plans to be put on hold because staff won't move with me, and you would be wasting your time seeking legal advice... The choice is simple, take the job or take redundancy"
All that is happening here is the existing admin function is being downsized. The original office structure may well remain and they may only be asking 5 of 12 staff to relocate. Unless there are no other employees than the 5 left, then why does an admin team have to move? Obviously we don't know the size of the business and if the office itself is relocating. If it is relocating then the offer may be reasonable but I'd be questioning why the position could not function and remain where it has done. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Much depends on some unknown information.
1. Has or will your job role change?
2. Will you be given a new contract of employment?
3. Have you been involved in any disciplinary procedure against you and had disciplinary action taken against you, the terms of which are currently unspent? (I.e. Verbal warning, written warning or final warning? Or had probation period extended? Which you are still currently under?)
4. Have you been employed by them for less than 24 months?
Much of what you have explained that they have said to you is perfectly legal and legitimate, with the exception of the four week trial period to which they may decide not to continue your employment.
To me, and I believe in the eyes of employment law, this would be considered as a new probationary period, and only legal if you have answered yes to any of the above points.
It's perfectly fair and reasonable to allow you a four week trial period to make a decision, but unfair and illegal for them to make a decision on that, if they were unhappy with your performance they would have to follow normal disciplinary procedures or performance management, or follow the legal route of redundancy.
All in all though I wouldn't worry, it doesn't sound dodgy or underhand, however if after 4 weeks trial THEY say they don't think it's working, remember what I've wrote above and seek legal advice immediately. X
Hi
In answer to your questions the answer is no to all of them.
"
Then if after four weeks YOU decide you wish to continue in your role at the new location, your employer can do absolutely nothing to prevent you from doing so within employment law, UNLESS they decide to make the role redundant completely, under which they are still bound by employment law to follow due redundancy practice. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
