Partner not given written notice of redundancy

T

TheRed

Registered User
Messages
50
My partner was told a week ago he was being made redundant. He hasn't received any written notice of this and is due to finish on March 5th (Thurs week). He has been told he will receive 2 weeks additional pay.

It was the second round of redundancies in the firm purportedly done on a "first in last out basis", but in reality they skipped over one guy who has a child and another who goes out with the boss' best friend.

If my partner finishes on March 5th, he will be 2 weeks short for receiving statutory redundancy.

My question is (i) do you have to receive written notice of redundancy?
(ii) do they have to give a reason why you were made redundant. We're hoping he will be able to drag out his finish date so he will qualify for statutory redundancy.
 
Check out [broken link removed]. It clearly states that employees must get written notice in the form of an RP50 form;

An employer is obliged to issue a written notice of redundancy to the employee (Form RP50) and to send a duplicate of the form with the employee's signature to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. Generally, the minimum period of notice will depend on a person's length of service or the period of notice in the person's contract of employment. The following table lists the minimum period of notice which a person is entitled to receive.

Length of employment -----------Minimum Period of Notice
Less than 13 weeks ...................Nil
13 weeks - 2 years ....................1 Week
2 years - 5 years .......................2 Weeks
5 years - 10 years .................... 4 Weeks
10 years - 15 years ................... 6 Weeks
More than 15 years ....................8 Weeks
 
Thanks for that.

He's there just shy of two years, so looks like he's only entitled to one week's written notice. His contract is pretty sparse and there's nothing on it about redundancy.
 
Hi TheRed
I was in same position 3 weeks ago, I phoned NERA (National Employment Rights) Authority
they say


employer is only obliged to give all details of redundancy payments 2 weeks
before termination of my employment.

notice period begins once they inform you verbally (nothing written)
 
Hi TheRed

Even when there are genuine grounds for redundancy the employer must still select who is made redundant fairly. Last in first out can be a fair selection procedure but if they do not have genuine business reasons for skipping out a couple of the people with shorter service your partner may have a case for unfair dismissal.
 
Thanks for that advise.

I'm really surprised. So is the redundancy.ie site wrong that you need notice in writing?

Business is down and none of the firm's clients are coughing up moneys owing. He's been expecting this for a few months.

Just hoping to squeeze a bit extra cash out of them.

Perhaps it might be worth sending a letter to the bossman, noting that not eligible for statutory redundancy as two weeks short and requesting clarification on the basis for being made redundant as notwithstanding being advised verbally that decision was on a "last in first out basis" other members of staff with shorter service records are not being made redundant.
Wonder would they offer him a lump sum based on 2 yrs work to placate him. Any thoughts?
 
Well TheRed ... i would certainly go down that route - its up to them ultimately what terms he leaves under.
If they are being so devious in letting him go just short of 2 yrs for obvious reasons. I would certainly play my cards the way you suggest and hope that he gets at least that from the whole situation.
The best of luck !
 
My partner received written notification of redundancy yesterday. The letter just said that due to the slowdown in the industry he was being made redundant without a more meaningful rationale (he was told verbally it was on a last in, first out basis). Also the head office is also questioning an expenses claim for €500 from him because he didn't submit the claim within one month of incurring expenses as per company policy (even though the clients have already been billed for these expenses and no doubt they will be counted as a expense for tax purposes).

He talked to his boss about the timing of the redundancy (after 103 weeks with the company) and their indication that they may not pay his travel expenses left him with a bad taste in his mouth coming up to his departure. He also told him he was aware that the "last in first out" criterion for making people redundant had to be applied consistently and he was aware this had not been done and technically he was being being unfairly dismissed.

His line manager has really been putting pressure on him to get certain projects done before he finishes up (he often works late, but has stopped doing this). When he spoke to his manager about this bad feeling, the manager said he would speak to the MD about it and see if they could sort something out. If I'm cynical, I'd say they're trying to get the most out of him before he leaves. If I'm optimistic, I'd say the MD might be concerned about being badmouthed in a small professional industry and might pay the expenses and offer additional redundancy.

Wait and see I suppose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top