Redundancy advice please.

byteagig

byteagig

byteagig

Associate
Joined
29 Jun 2005
Posts
614
Location
york
My son has been informed that he has been selected for redundancy.

Our employer has used a points system to select employees using several criteria including

Disiplinary record

Length of service

Job knowledge

Efficiency

Skill level.

The last three criteria have been scored using the personal opinions of two shift managers, and then checked and approved by their manager. My son works under one of the shift managers and the other one doesn't know him well at all having never worked with him for any length of time as he is on a totally different shift.

They have scored him very low on the last three criteria making him one of the lowest scores and therefore one of the selected few for redundancy. I work with my son and know without any doubt that he does a good job and everyone else on our shift agrees including team leaders.

A few weeks ago he had his annual employee appraisal which was very positive. He has never been in any trouble and he has 100% attendance since he started over 3 years ago.

Is the selection process that they have used a fair and proper way to do it? I believe that they have deliberately scored him low to get rid of him. I believe that the system they have used is open to abuse and manipulation because they have used personal opinions and not measurable criteria.

Has anyone got any advice or been in a similar situation?
 
Surprised there are criteria at all tbh. Usually it's totally down to who the manager least wants to keep.

I don't think arguing the case is going to end up in him still working there, so maybe a waste of time.
 
I have no experience with the redundancy process, but I thought there was rules they have to follow to make it fair for everyone?
 
To be fair has he been given the opertunity to ‘improve’.

For example: staff training/development?

Was it the team that was selected or was he personally targeted?

If I’m going to be honest, it may be worth helping him spruce up his CV and get some interviews in as soon as possible. Doesn’t sound too good but maybe you could talk to ACAS?
 
Thanks for the reply. He hasn't had any opportunities to improve simply because he hasn't had any negative feedback about his performance. On his appraisal a few weeks ago he got a overall 'good work' rating from his manager.
He works in a team of 12 split across 3 shifts. 4 on each shift. They were all informed that there was going to be 3 people selected. I believe that they have deliberately scored him low to get rid, simply because of his record of a good standard of work.
The day he was informed that he was selected for redundancy he was told to go home on full pay and they let me take him home.
When I returned to work I saw they had another employee doing his job. The manager eventually moved the other employee after I and other people complained.

I know it would be pointless fighting it but it's just good to get this off my chest to be honest.
He has his consultation in a couple of days and I'm going with him. They did tell him there is a good chance that he might be offered an alternative position but it will be less money.
 
I highly doubt they would want to get rid of someone if they were good in the workplace. That’s the reason companies exist.

Maybe he has done something that they don’t like and they not saying? People can be strange.

It’s obviously a money saving exercise.
 
They don't want him, best advice is get a new job... It's not like he has worked there 10 years, started the company or invented widget x that made them a trillion pounds!
 
This seems a fairly standard approach. I've been ''' risk' numerous times during my career (always at large companies which tend to follow correct process). They will have to consult with staff (which is basically telling they are at risk) and then define criteria to decide which roles are lost.

It is always the role rather than the person who is made redundant. So for example if there are 3 people doing the same role and the company needs to make 1 redundancy then they will determine a scoring system as outlined above. The people who score highest retain their roles and the other person is let go.

However it is quite easy to decide who you want to get rid of and use that to determine how the scoring system will be designed.
 
How long have the other people worked there? They might pay lip service to the other criteria but at the end of the day if probably comes down to how much it costs and the less the service the less the redundancy.
 
Thanks for all the replies. We are going to the consultation tomorrow, I think the best outcome we can expect is that they offer him the other role that they previously mentioned which is £1.70ph less.

Seems like an awful lot of effort on their part just to save £1.70 per hour x 3??? Afaik they are offering the lesser paid roles to the other 2 lads as well.
 
mrbell1984 said:
I highly doubt they would want to get rid of someone if they were good in the workplace. That’s the reason companies exist.

Maybe he has done something that they don’t like and they not saying? People can be strange.

It’s obviously a money saving exercise.
Click to expand...

The world isn't so straight forward. His manager might want to reserve the headcount for his mate or whatever reason.
 
byteagig said:
I have no experience with the redundancy process, but I thought there was rules they have to follow to make it fair for everyone?
Click to expand...

Usually you have a round of 'voluntary redundancy' first. Gives a change for anyone looking to retire slightly early or change careers the opportunity to leave with a nice golden handshake.

That said, you have to apply for the voluntary redundancy. Just because you want to go doesn't mean they'll let you.

If they haven't had enough redundancies after the 1st round of voluntary, they will usually do a second round of it. If they still need to loose people after that 2nd round, then the compulsory redundancies usually kick in.

This is in large corporations at least (I've been made redundant by, and then subsequently sat through many more redundancies, in the BBC).

In this instance, I'd say for him to just take the money and find a new job. If they don't want you there anymore, it won't be a great working relationship / environment if you manage to stay.

3 years service should get him 3 months full pay.
 
They said from the beginning that they aren't offering voluntary redundancy for some reason.
It's a very large multinational company we work for.

Went to the consultation today, and have another one on Friday morning.
 
Personally I would take the money and run, if there was any chance at all of another comparable paid job in the area. Taking another job for less money at the same place would smack of desperation.
 
Well that's the sneaky thing that they have done here, is offer these guys a suitable alternative position and if they turn it down they lose their right to statutory redundancy pay.

Win win for the company
 
Pretty sure it's more to do with whether the job title still exists than whether they can effectively demote people.

Are you part of a union and all that? I've never seen a company get away with doing that, and if it were legal, surely many more would be doing it?
 
Just to clarify, he was made redundant completely out the of the blue? Under UK law, employers have to notify all employees affected by the loss of a job role (not a person) and start a consultation period lasting no less than 45 days. During those 45 days they will assess and score people based upon their own criteria - if they want rid of them there is very little you can do - however you can challenge any assessment score. It's also not exactly professional for him to know he has scored less than anyone else. Get onto ACAS for more info / help.

Source: my department is currently going through this (through no fault of our own I might add!).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom