Redundancies

[100SRV]

Hi,
here is a real-life situation, I would appreciate some advice from the PH collective as to what course of action to take...if any

Tuesday
Company announces that there will be redundancies via department manager, volunteers to have applied by DD/MM date subject to usual terms. Also told that my department will suffer X redundancies and another department Y redundancies. No other departments will be affected, no selection criteria are stated.

Employee looks on intranet for company redundancy policy and finds that the following avoidance measures are listed amongst which: natural wastage, shorter hours, no recruitment, no overtime, release agency workers.

Employee realises that no steps have been taken to negotiate reduced hours, corporate explanation is that "reduced hours is a short-term measure and that this situation will continue for a long time"

Employee looks at vacancies on intranet, presently there are more than 8 advertised. Overtime is being worked as before.

One week later
No criteria for selection have been provided, overtime continues and morale in office is lower than a mole's belly.

To my mind this contravenes stated corporate policy - is this legally enforcable?
Have any laws been broken?
Is it unlawful to define the number to be made redundant in one department whilst not affecting others if no criteria have been defined?

I'm not sure whether I am at risk but having seen the way the business handles it's affairs I don't think rational thought is used as part of the decision-making process.

Hope you can help folks!

[Engineer1]

Redundancies mean roles are not required so stating that 4 from development and 5 from marketing or similar seems reasonable, be thankful they are warning you.

[Cap'n Custud]

OK. So before I start I have had a celebratory drink so forgive the odd typo I miss.

For starters, it is roles that get made redundant not people. Are any of the roles advertised the same as jobs that have been notified of possible redundancy?

Selection criteria, If I am wrong but from my working knowledge the employer does not have to tell you what the criteria is for selection of redundancy beforehand as the results should already be in evidance for the roles that are being considered.

If the company policy states that other avenues need to be addressed before redundancy is considered an option then you must raise this query with HR to seen assurance that this has already been addressed, GET IT IN WRITING! I cannot stress enough that if you suspect a problem with the administration then you must raise this.

If my advice is bed or if you are in any doubt, write it all down and call ACAS. Plese bear in mind that the Emplyment rules changed on 6th April and they aare a lot more in favouur of the employer!

Hope this helps, probably not but blame peroni if i have mis understood your query!

edited and I am a numpty!

Edited by Cap'n Custud on Wednesday 6th May 19:05

[miniman]

Cap'n Custud said:

write it all down and call ACAS.

No, please don't. If you think the company is trying to use the "recession" excuse to chop a few heads, then keep in mind there are many significantly easier ways to do so than go down the redundancy route. If the company is genuinely in the st, calling in ACAS is more likely to accelerate its demise. Redundancies are st, but unfortunately a necessary evil for many companies at the moment.

[Cap'n Custud]

miniman said:

Cap'n Custud said:

write it all down and call ACAS.

No, please don't. If you think the company is trying to use the "recession" excuse to chop a few heads, then keep in mind there are many significantly easier ways to do so than go down the redundancy route. If the company is genuinely in the st, calling in ACAS is more likely to accelerate its demise. Redundancies are st, but unfortunately a necessary evil for many companies at the moment.

I don't mean to be rude miniman but ACAS offer some very valuable and anonymous support. And writing down what is happening is very good advice if you need to refer back to events and conversations at a later point. I offered this advice in honest faith and as a HR advisor. If you don't keep track of what is being said and when, how can you possibly depend on this at a later date if it is found to be a case of unfair selection. Also, it's ACAS you turn to when you feel you have been unfairly selected.

[Engineer1]

Maybe the company is expecting to be able to fill the redundancies with volunteers. Remember that the company may well be able to transfer some of the people being made redundant to some of the roles they are advertising.

[miniman]

Cap'n Custud said:

miniman said:

Cap'n Custud said:

write it all down and call ACAS.

No, please don't. If you think the company is trying to use the "recession" excuse to chop a few heads, then keep in mind there are many significantly easier ways to do so than go down the redundancy route. If the company is genuinely in the st, calling in ACAS is more likely to accelerate its demise. Redundancies are st, but unfortunately a necessary evil for many companies at the moment.

I don't mean to be rude miniman but ACAS offer some very valuable and anonymous support. And writing down what is happening is very good advice if you need to refer back to events and conversations at a later point. I offered this advice in honest faith and as a HR advisor. If you don't keep track of what is being said and when, how can you possibly depend on this at a later date if it is found to be a case of unfair selection. Also, it's ACAS you turn to when you feel you have been unfairly selected.

I don't deny that there are things that ACAS are useful for, however I do get pretty frustrated when the stock response to a redundancy query is "go to ACAS" or "take them to the cleaners" or "find a no-win-no-fee lawyer" rather than "put your concerns to your employer and see what they say, they are highly unlikely in this day and age to be doing something that will end them up in a tribunal".

[Jasandjules]

Make notes of everything which is happening, including dates and times.

Then, wait and see what happens.

[Cap'n Custud]

miniman said:

Cap'n Custud said:

miniman said:

Cap'n Custud said:

write it all down and call ACAS.

No, please don't. If you think the company is trying to use the "recession" excuse to chop a few heads, then keep in mind there are many significantly easier ways to do so than go down the redundancy route. If the company is genuinely in the st, calling in ACAS is more likely to accelerate its demise. Redundancies are st, but unfortunately a necessary evil for many companies at the moment.

I don't mean to be rude miniman but ACAS offer some very valuable and anonymous support. And writing down what is happening is very good advice if you need to refer back to events and conversations at a later point. I offered this advice in honest faith and as a HR advisor. If you don't keep track of what is being said and when, how can you possibly depend on this at a later date if it is found to be a case of unfair selection. Also, it's ACAS you turn to when you feel you have been unfairly selected.

I don't deny that there are things that ACAS are useful for, however I do get pretty frustrated when the stock response to a redundancy query is "go to ACAS" or "take them to the cleaners" or "find a no-win-no-fee lawyer" rather than "put your concerns to your employer and see what they say, they are highly unlikely in this day and age to be doing something that will end them up in a tribunal".

I am sure you do. And I speak as a manager who has seen more than their fair deal of meetings with ACAS as a defendant on behalf of companies (bad employer contracts!)! But, if you feel you are being unfairly treated then they can advise if your thoughts and evidence are possibly substanntiated. BTW, ACAS support the employer a lot more under the new rulings. I attended a very good seminar on this just last week and feel that there will be a drop in the ridiculous claims that employers have faced since 2004.

I use ACAS anonymously when I am usure of how to proceed with a HR issue. Their advice to me an an employer has alwayss been spot on. I have never gone to them as an employee so I can't comment on the strength of their advice.

[ipwn]

miniman said:

Cap'n Custud said:

miniman said:

Cap'n Custud said:

write it all down and call ACAS.

No, please don't. If you think the company is trying to use the "recession" excuse to chop a few heads, then keep in mind there are many significantly easier ways to do so than go down the redundancy route. If the company is genuinely in the st, calling in ACAS is more likely to accelerate its demise. Redundancies are st, but unfortunately a necessary evil for many companies at the moment.

I don't mean to be rude miniman but ACAS offer some very valuable and anonymous support. And writing down what is happening is very good advice if you need to refer back to events and conversations at a later point. I offered this advice in honest faith and as a HR advisor. If you don't keep track of what is being said and when, how can you possibly depend on this at a later date if it is found to be a case of unfair selection. Also, it's ACAS you turn to when you feel you have been unfairly selected.

I don't deny that there are things that ACAS are useful for, however I do get pretty frustrated when the stock response to a redundancy query is "go to ACAS" or "take them to the cleaners" or "find a no-win-no-fee lawyer" rather than "put your concerns to your employer and see what they say, they are highly unlikely in this day and age to be doing something that will end them up in a tribunal".

I was under the impression that ACAS had no real power unless both parties agreed to allow acas to handle the full situation and both parties would agree with the solution acas would come up with ?

[edc]

100SRV said:

Hi,
here is a real-life situation, I would appreciate some advice from the PH collective as to what course of action to take...if any

Tuesday
Company announces that there will be redundancies via department manager, volunteers to have applied by DD/MM date subject to usual terms. Also told that my department will suffer X redundancies and another department Y redundancies. No other departments will be affected, no selection criteria are stated.

Employee looks on intranet for company redundancy policy and finds that the following avoidance measures are listed amongst which: natural wastage, shorter hours, no recruitment, no overtime, release agency workers.

Employee realises that no steps have been taken to negotiate reduced hours, corporate explanation is that "reduced hours is a short-term measure and that this situation will continue for a long time"

Employee looks at vacancies on intranet, presently there are more than 8 advertised. Overtime is being worked as before.

One week later
No criteria for selection have been provided, overtime continues and morale in office is lower than a mole's belly.

To my mind this contravenes stated corporate policy - is this legally enforcable?
Have any laws been broken?
Is it unlawful to define the number to be made redundant in one department whilst not affecting others if no criteria have been defined?

I'm not sure whether I am at risk but having seen the way the business handles it's affairs I don't think rational thought is used as part of the decision-making process.

Hope you can help folks!

It would be a poorly constructed policy that says the company must go through shorter hours etc before redundancy. Hence, no obligation to 'negotiate' shorter hours. Typically it will say something like 'we will do whatever we can to avoid redundancy including considering x, y, z.' They may well have already considered all other possibilities. Also, from the events you describe nobody has actually been dismissed by reason of redundancy as yet, so as part of any consultation these items can be raised. You are more than entitled to see what the selection criteria, your score, but you have no right to see how you compare to others, and of course you can dispute them if they are discriminatory. Like most things in life though, if the company really wanted to, the criteria can be manipulated to produce a desired outcome.

[Firefoot]

As an employee in the affected department, your Line Manager or HR dept should be inviting you to a one to one meeting to discuss the matter with you. The meeting gives the employer a chance to inform you of the Companys actions, and for you to ask questions. One of the things that will be discussed is the possibility of redeployment. If there are vacancies, and you are capable of doing them with a reasonable level of training then you should be considered for them. If the employer doesn't offer this option, then ask them about it.

ACAS are independant and can offer guidance on the types of questions you may want to ask at these meetings. Simply talking to them does not cause any problems for the employer and ACAS will not be pursuading you to dash off to a tribunal any time soon.

It is not wholly uncommon for overtime to continue in certain departments whilst being cut in others during these situations. It all depends on the job type. For example, the company I work for make two very different products on the same site. One product could suffer a sales drop off and I may have to look at making people in that department redundant, whilst the other product is selling well and production in that department is at full capacity requiring overtime.

Edited by Firefoot on Thursday 7th May 09:42

[Who me ?]

First of all be aware that time limits for ACAS complaints have shortened.
Secondly - (AFAIK)- THERE ARE NUMBERS LIMITATIONS ON THE CONSULTATION PERIODS .Up to 10 redundancies - none required.Over 10 ,but less than 100 -30 days .Over 100 -90 days .Looking at your first post -two things I'd do -seek legal advice /join a union .

[miniman]

Who me said:

join a union .

Yes because *that* never led to any job losses, did it?

edit: where's that new parser when you need it?

Edited by miniman on Monday 11th May 22:30