Company moving locations - legal rights?

[bobski1]

So the small simple company I worked for has recently been taken over by a much bigger competitor, originally it was all going to be left as is and have 2 separate companies as we specialise in 2 different fields. However recently there has been talk about moving our workforce all into 1 building.

I don't really have much experience of this and not quite sure what the legal rights are. For some it is better as the new location is closer but for others it is further away, about 30miles however the traffic in that direction is a pain so although the distance isn't too far the extra commute will be another 30mins and more on a good day.

There have been some consultations, more general discussions, with some representatives and nothing 1 to 1 to say this is what is happening. Should I expect something more formal or because it's big company will they just email over a contract and say sign or leave?

Personally I don't mind the extra commute as long as there is some increase in salary to make up for it but my expectations are the bare minimum to say that it was all legal. I haven't even bothered to engage HR as with a company of that size they're there to protect the company from the people rather than the other way round.

Any guidance would be greately appreciated

[simon_harris]

A company I worked for moved locations, to keep it simple there were based j26 of the M1 and moved close to J28 of the M1. there was much discussion about making payments for the first 6 months to cover additional travel costs etc but in the end it was move with us or leave.

[YorkshireStu]

I experienced this in 2010. The company I worked for closed its office near where I lived and made most who worked in it redundant. I was offered a place at the Head Office. On the other side of London. I was living and working in High Wycombe. The commute would have gone from 10 minutes to a lot.

They offered me zilch in exchange apart from flexible start/finish time to commute in less dense traffic and simply said my only other option was redundancy. I took that.

In your case, perhaps a day or two working from home to offset the extra commute?

[Tango13]

I worked for a company that moved from St Albans to Luton which put something like 6 miles on my commute and I was paid £1 per mile every week without fail, I'm pretty certain that £1/mile was the law back then but it was quite a few years back.

Seek qualified legal representation.

[Muzzer79]

It's a mis-conception with re-location that there is some kind of map radius or zone as to what is acceptable and what isn't.

You're contracted to one location so it's about what the effect to you as an employee when that location moves.

I have dealt with relocations of 2 miles and of 200 miles. We've had people from both successfully state that the move affected them enough that it wasn't viable.

So, your choices are:

1. Negotiate to accept the detrimental conditions - i.e agree that the company will compensate you in some way to travel to the new site.

2. Request redundancy, which cannot be denied if you can successfully demonstrate that the new location is not feasible for you. This isn't too hard - we had someone successfully argue, for example, that they needed to be local in order to travel home and let their dog out at lunchtime.

[Jasandjules]

First rule is check the contract - what does it say abour your place of work?

[98elise]

Jasandjules said:

First rule is check the contract - what does it say abour your place of work?

This. If it's a big company they will likely have this covered, and a whole lot more you didn't realise you agreed to!

[Dynion Araf Uchaf]

fairly certain that moving the office 30 miles from its previous location, is deemed an acceptable commute, and therefore fair.

Large parts of re-location decisions are done to make it no longer convenient for some staff members to come to work, so they resign, which clearly assists in redundancy costs for the employer.

[bobski1]

YorkshireStu said:

I experienced this in 2010. The company I worked for closed its office near where I lived and made most who worked in it redundant. I was offered a place at the Head Office. On the other side of London. I was living and working in High Wycombe. The commute would have gone from 10 minutes to a lot.

They offered me zilch in exchange apart from flexible start/finish time to commute in less dense traffic and simply said my only other option was redundancy. I took that.

In your case, perhaps a day or two working from home to offset the extra commute?

For some working some days from home will work but for me my biggest issue is that currently as demanding as my job is I can still get home in 15-20mins and see the boy before bed, the traffic at the new place means if I hit a bad patch it'll be hit and miss, along with the extra cost of fuel and support to the mrs if I am not around for an hour or 2 extra each day.

Tango13 said:

I worked for a company that moved from St Albans to Luton which put something like 6 miles on my commute and I was paid £1 per mile every week without fail, I'm pretty certain that £1/mile was the law back then but it was quite a few years back.

Seek qualified legal representation.

From what I have read they want to pay the basic 0.45p per mile the difference for 1 year and then I assume people will decide if it is for them or not. They said this would be included in pay so still subject to tax and NI, is this right or should it not be classed as an expense like if I had to go to a supplier?

Where is best to get some real legal advice? I'm not a PBD so I don't have a solicitor on retainer...

98elise said:

Jasandjules said:

First rule is check the contract - what does it say abour your place of work?

This. If it's a big company they will likely have this covered, and a whole lot more you didn't realise you agreed to!

So contract states a single place of work which is our current site, they will need to renew contracts if we were to move.

Muzzer79 said:

It's a mis-conception with re-location that there is some kind of map radius or zone as to what is acceptable and what isn't.

You're contracted to one location so it's about what the effect to you as an employee when that location moves.

I have dealt with relocations of 2 miles and of 200 miles. We've had people from both successfully state that the move affected them enough that it wasn't viable.

So, your choices are:

1. Negotiate to accept the detrimental conditions - i.e agree that the company will compensate you in some way to travel to the new site.

2. Request redundancy, which cannot be denied if you can successfully demonstrate that the new location is not feasible for you. This isn't too hard - we had someone successfully argue, for example, that they needed to be local in order to travel home and let their dog out at lunchtime.

From what I have read it just states it must be reasonable but no definition on that.

We're currently trying to get an answer on what the compensation will be as the only mention has been mileage rather than a here is £XX extra per year.

If people rejected the move then would they have to offer redundancy? My current feeling is that they're making this process as awkard as possible to that people leave on their own accord

[Panamax]

Dynion Araf Uchaf said:

fairly certain that moving the office 30 miles from its previous location, is deemed an acceptable commute, and therefore fair.

That's unlikely.

• Read the contract.
• If the employer moving your place of work in that way is permitted you might just have to suck it up.
• If it's not covered then you're likely to be looking at a simple choice of accepting the change or being made redundant.

The bottom line in such decision making often comes down to,

• How long have you worked there?
• What's your contractual notice period?
• Would getting another job screw up any good pension arrangements?
• How easy is it for you to get another job?

Redundancy is not always to be feared, especially if you can pocket a wedge of cash and get straight into another job.

[Jasandjules]

If your contract just has one specified location then youare technicall being made Redundant. The question is do you want to pursue that option?

[Muzzer79]

Dynion Araf Uchaf said:

fairly certain that moving the office 30 miles from its previous location, is deemed an acceptable commute, and therefore fair.

This is incorrect.

There is no such thing as an 'acceptable' commute.

I could move your office 1 mile up the road and you could successfully (if legitimate) argue that it is not acceptable and have a case for redundancy.

As stated previous, we had a guy successful argue against relocation a couple of miles up the road because he had to go home and feed his dog at lunchtimes and the extra distance wouldn't make it viable to continue to do so.

Now, it's important to realise that the location move is happening - like it or not. It therefore leaves your options as accepting it, negotiating better terms or getting redundancy.

[Muzzer79]

bobski1 said:

Muzzer79 said:

It's a mis-conception with re-location that there is some kind of map radius or zone as to what is acceptable and what isn't.

You're contracted to one location so it's about what the effect to you as an employee when that location moves.

I have dealt with relocations of 2 miles and of 200 miles. We've had people from both successfully state that the move affected them enough that it wasn't viable.

So, your choices are:

1. Negotiate to accept the detrimental conditions - i.e agree that the company will compensate you in some way to travel to the new site.

2. Request redundancy, which cannot be denied if you can successfully demonstrate that the new location is not feasible for you. This isn't too hard - we had someone successfully argue, for example, that they needed to be local in order to travel home and let their dog out at lunchtime.

From what I have read it just states it must be reasonable but no definition on that.

We're currently trying to get an answer on what the compensation will be as the only mention has been mileage rather than a here is £XX extra per year.

If people rejected the move then would they have to offer redundancy? My current feeling is that they're making this process as awkard as possible to that people leave on their own accord

Correct - reasonable is a very broad term. 30 miles can be unreasonable, 3 miles can be unreasonable - it depends on your circumstances.

If you reject the move then your only option is redundancy which, if you have successfully argued that the distance is unreasonable, the company will need to offer.

Speak to ACAS if you need help.

In my experience, if you are not provided with company transport, 30 miles for a 'regular' employee is fairly easy to argue as unreasonable due to extra travel time and cost alone.

But be aware that this path leads only to redundancy. You won't be able to stay where you are, for obvious reasons.

Only you know if redundancy is an acceptable thing in your circumstances. If you think you'll struggle to find similar/acceptable work, it can be best to suck the distance up and go with it.