Redundancy - conditions change on 2nd round

All
My wife has been put on protective notice, her job is gone and there is a role that a number of others are going for, she won't get it as she is not qualified.
They are been offered 2 weeks for every year.

What I was curious about, was that at the end of Feb there were a number of redundancies, these people got 4 weeks for every year. Those that remained, my wife wanted to try and stick it out and see if they could get out of it, were told that should be it and it would be a long time until they need to do anything like this.

Until today, they were all told that their existing jobs were gone and there would be a very small number of new roles available, but with a lot less money been offered, but covering a number of jobs.
So for example my wifes job and that of another person, those are both gone, but they have created a new role which rolls these 2 roles into one and one of them will get it. The money will be a lot less than they were on.

What I am curious is, can they offer redundancy only 6 weeks after the last round, when those who remained were told it would be a long time again, and the compensation is 2 weeks, not 4.

Also can they remove existing roles and roll them into one as above?

Many thanks

I am sure they can offer different terms and conditions in different rounds of redundancies, I took an earlier round of redundancy from where I worked, 2 more rounds since within a fairly short space of time have been progressively less than the original one.

Your wife would be entitled to get the 4 weeks if that was the latest, plenty of case law to back this up...you should probably speak to an employment law specialist

Raging Bull said:

Your wife would be entitled to get the 4 weeks if that was the latest, plenty of case law to back this up...you should probably speak to an employment law specialist

Click to expand...

Do you think she would? I think it incredible that they would screw over those who stayed loyal from the 1st redundancy package and offer them 1/2 of what the other offering was.

Based on previous experience in our household - you are nearly always better off going in the first wave of redundancies

I don't think the employers look at it that way, loyalty means sfa these days.

Companies have no legal requirement to pay anything other then statutory so they are entitled to adjust anything on top of that if they so wish. Packages in banks for example are a lot less then they would have been 6 or 7 years ago

However, they will need to have adjusted it for all employees, not just for indivuduals

So she finishes tomorrow. They took her job and said it no longer existed, hers along with a 2 more. They then created 2 new roles, paying a lot less money, the parental leave was not an option and she had to do 2 shifts per week from 1pm to 9pm which meant that she could never do it as our childminder can't take the kids after 6 and I work away. So she was left with no option but to turn down the new role. That said her old jobs task are now part of this new job.
She has not received any official letter or email from the company outlining the 2 weeks per year.
A few have said that she could have a case where they removed her job, yet all tasks exist in new, lower paid role.
Also that the 4 weeks offer should have stayed. They were told after the 1st bunch of people left that since they had over the quota of people who accepted redundancy, then this would make them secure!!
Also what they have found is that a lot of the support people are now leaving and they are panicing, in order to retain people they are offering those who stay a retention bonus. So they are cutting costs and letting people go, yet offering bonuses to others in a different department.

I'm adamant she should go to a solicitor with this, but with her going tomorrow then she might be too late!

Sounds like a strong case for unfair dismissal the process to take a case is straight forward and you can find the forms and some background on the net

Couple of points worth noting here

• there is nothing to stop a company changing it's redundancy policies for a 2nd or subsequent round. It may not be necessarily fair but they have no legal obligation to pay more then statutory
• the fact that they are offering retention bonuses to staff in other departments is largely irrelevant and is more a reflection of the incompetence of management then potential evidence of any wrong-doing

Remember as well that people do not get made redundant, roles do. By restructuring your wife's department potentially they may have a defence

I also would question of this is a case of unfair dismissal since she has not actually been dismissed. Instead she has been left in a position where because of the restructuring, the hours in question do not suit her personal lifestyle and she may be left with no option but to leave. That may instead mean that she is in a position of constructive dismissal where the actions of her employers left her no option but to resign.

Yop,

Within the State Services there are good sites that advise on unfair dismissal/employment law.
suggest have a good look at them., as per Raging Bull.
.....................................................................
Unfair as it may be.
1. If Company can show 1pm to 9pm suits them = tough on her.
2. To prove all tasks remain the same = hard to prove.
3. The 4 weeks should have stayed but employer calls that .
4. Companies always say remaining jobs are secure. They want to retain staff in a way that suits them.
5. Support staff are leaving ,that's why they said jobs are secure , but since support staff are leaving , that ain,t working.
6. Be slow to go to a Solicitor, most are not Employment savvy.
..................
I presume there is no Union in house that she can ask?

I am not particularly well-versed on the matter but have you had a look at the NERA website?
[broken link removed]

I am a minority shareholder in a business I cofounded 5 years ago.
The business is Dublin based and has opened a callcentre almost 150kms North.

I have been told this is now the place of work. Do I need to accept this?

Carlio said:

I am a minority shareholder in a business I cofounded 5 years ago.
The business is Dublin based and has opened a callcentre almost 150kms North.

I have been told this is now the place of work. Do I need to accept this?

Click to expand...

What has this to do with redundancy terms changing in a second round? Create a new thread and you are more likely to get a response.