Redundancy query

[Laplace]

My job is currently at risk which should be read as I will be made redundant by end of March at the latest.

During the consultation period one of the questions we asked was "If we were to have a job offer on the table and we had not applied for voluntary redundancy within the alotted window (which has now expired) would we still receve our redundancy payments if we submitted our notice?"

We were then told we would retain our redundancy payments.

We're now in a situation where some members of our team have left via voluntary redundancy, those lucky enough to walk into other jobs. Meanwhile a colleague has just had a job offer and told that if he leaves now he won't get redundacy payment.

The money isn't the issue here for them, its a very large global firm with over 100,000 staff. The problem is they have uncovered some contractual obligations they need us to tie off before they can release us and they are flapping about it. I can sympathise that it now doesn't suit the business to release us but having based a decision to stay on what they said in answer to the above question, my colleague and I would have taken voluntary redundancy when we had the opportunity, now it feels like we are being held to ransom.

Having never been through this process before I was wondering what the thoughts of others are?

Edited by Laplace on Friday 25th January 18:46

[Keep it stiff]

It may well be that the decision by the employer to allow staff to leave before the end of their notice period yet retain their settlement is simply a matter of discretion. Employers sometime seek to ease the discomfort of staff who's roles have been made redundant by allowing earlier departures without there being any obligation to do so. If circumstances have changed for the employer, or perhaps a manager over-stepped the mark by suggesting somethimg that has proved to be incorrect, the employer might be completely correct in expecting notice periods to be worked. It does however beg the question as to if the roles really should be redundant. There are a few "ifs" in here due to the unknowns! Large employers are best placed to deal with these circumstances correctly and as such you should get the full and correct clarification be referring to your HR department.

[Simon Brooks]

Speak to Acas Great for impartial accurate advice provided they have all the facts

[Laplace]

Keep it stiff said:

It may well be that the decision by the employer to allow staff to leave before the end of their notice period yet retain their settlement is simply a matter of discretion. Employers sometime seek to ease the discomfort of staff who's roles have been made redundant by allowing earlier departures without there being any obligation to do so. If circumstances have changed for the employer, or perhaps a manager over-stepped the mark by suggesting somethimg that has proved to be incorrect, the employer might be completely correct in expecting notice periods to be worked. It does however beg the question as to if the roles really should be redundant. There are a few "ifs" in here due to the unknowns! Large employers are best placed to deal with these circumstances correctly and as such you should get the full and correct clarification be referring to your HR department.

Sorry, the issue isn't being made to work our notice period. We fully expect to have to do this now.

What my employer is now saying is that because we missed the window for applying for voluntary redundancy, which was during the consultation period, the only way we will retain redundancy payments is if we stay til the bitter end (end of march). When the give us our notice, basically.

So, if I get a job offer tomorrow and then work my months notice I wont get any redundancy.

The crux of all this is that we were told we would and made a decision to stay based on that.

Simon Brooks said:

Speak to Acas Great for impartial accurate advice provided they have all the facts

Thanks, I'll look into that.

Edited by Laplace on Saturday 26th January 11:33