Sniper 1:15 Sun Feb 23
Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
|
I was made redundant by the company I worked for for 11 years last year (I was informed of being unsuccessful applying for my post in March and my 12 weeks redeployment lasted until June). It was quite a big cull - around half the team of 45 people were let go, we had 30 days consultation and so on.
However, whilst trying to look for a new role I’ve signed up to a number of agencies and one role that has been recommended to me is...
My old job. On the same team. With the same manager. The post even says they are ‘looking to take on a number of staff on a fixed term role for 12 months with a view to making some permanent’
Is there a timescale for when a redundant post magically becomes needed again?
|
|
|
Replies - In Chronological Order ( Show Newest Messages First)
hammer205
1:21 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
They magically change the job responsibilities to make it look like a new job and because it’s a contract job it isn’t permanently filled is probably what they’ll say
Check you gov
https://www.gov.uk/redundancy-your-rights
https://www.acas.org.uk/
|
gank
1:51 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
If you were any good at it, you wouldn't be posting this.
So I wouldn't bother applying as you're already deemed incompetent and unlike the other applicants, you've already proven yourself crap at this.
|
lowermarshhammer
3:23 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
Seem like they didn't like you and you'll like yourself even less if you give the cunts a second's thought.
File under MOVE ON
Working in an office having to deal with the same old people in close proximity really must be tedious grim shit.
FUCK THAT
|
Westside
10:39 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
Sniper isn't saying he w want his old job back (he may).
However, if redundancy was used as an excuse for dismissal and the old job still genuinely exists, he can file a claim for unfair dismissal. The compensation for which, would be substantially higher, than statutory redundancy pay.
|
Toe Rag
10:51 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
So. You’re situation is uncannily similar to that of Moyes about 6 months ago.
I think there’s a lesson in here somewhere.
|
Sven Roeder
10:51 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
When you were made redundant you would have been given access to legal advice (which the company pays for) so that it can be said you were properly advised.
If you still have the contact it’s worth dropping them an email and pointing out the situation.
They might give you some advice (if they are decent lawyers) or take an interest (if they are ambulance chasers who see some business).
|
Sxboy_66
10:59 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
It's not the person that is made redundant, it's the position, which then cannot be recreated for 6 months.
They've covered their arse legally mate. They're just ethically utter cunts.
|
Westside
12:33 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
it's the position, which then cannot be recreated for 6 months.
Not true. There is no statutory time limit, on re creating the position.
https://www.xperthr.co.uk/faq/is-an-employer-obliged-to-wait-a-certain-period-of-time-before-re-employing-an-employee-who-was-dismissed-for-redundancy/87445/
|
Sniper
5:32 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
I have zero interest in reapplying first the job and it was fucking horrible for the 30 days ‘consultation’ (which, as most of you know, translates as ‘ask any questions you want but we’ve made our minds up’) then the period of all applying against each other and then coming in to work every day for 3 months whilst trying to find something else
When the results of the interviews were being made, I called all but two of who would/wouldn’t be kept on. It was obvious. I don’t even dispute that the people who got the job ahead of me were better - but it’s fucking shit all the stress and worry they put all of us through to then, 6 months later, be recruiting again to the exact same posts
That’s bullshit
|
gank
5:37 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
Just let it go, Sniper. If you think they're all a bunch of cunts then you're best off out of there, don't waste your time worrying about it.
|
Vexed
5:40 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
Name and shame the firm then. You don't work there no more, look unlikely to have any legal recourse, they're cunts - let the world know!
This is all because of them touch screens in McDonald's isnt it? Bang out of order.
|
Manuel
5:48 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
You can't and won't do a single thing about it. Stop wasting everyone's time and move on ffs. Life aint like a movie.
|
Sxboy_66
5:49 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
Westside 12:33 Sun Feb 23
That refers to giving the redundant person their old job back.
That isn't what's happened here.
|
Westside
5:59 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
Westside 12:33 Sun Feb 23
That refers to giving the redundant person their old job back.
No, the article also refers to giving the position to anybody.
"The employer is under no obligation to offer the redundant employee their job back; it is entitled to recruit someone else instead."
About the 5th line of the article. Did you actually read the articie?
|
Spandex Sidney
6:02 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
You could speak to ACAS. Or you can just move on?
Or maybe do both?
However if you do speak to ACAS you will be blackballed from here as you're clearly a leftist shitbag who has no rightful place in the 1000 years WHO Reich that has now been gloriously established.
|
Side of Ham
6:23 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
Manuel 5:48 Sun Feb 23
Proof this poster is a cunt and needs to be ignored if that’s how he treats someone down on his luck.....and a fellow West Ham fan to boot.....
|
Manuel
6:56 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
Put the violin away, Snide. I need to be ignored yet you respond to my post? Oh I'm sorry, you was just warning others, lol. Never seizes to amaze me how seriously some treat this forum still even after all these years. Go fuck yourself.
|
Side of Ham
7:12 Sun Feb 23
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
I didn’t reply to you, you cunt I pointed out what a cunt you are now backed up by your second post.
Just because you are obviously on some spectrum doesn’t mean you can’t be pulled up on your lowlife postings on here.
|
Exiled In Surrey
10:48 Tue Feb 25
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
Get your union involved.
|
Pickle Rick
11:03 Tue Feb 25
Re: Employment law - redundancies and filling ‘redundant’ pists
|
You need to get advice as they could say its a different role that you didn't meet the 70% or whatever requirement to carry be successful after re-applying, or read it as they wanted to get rid of you so they changed it just enough that you wouldn't get it and there is nothing you can do about it when the re-advertise, even if your pride was rock bottom and you applied your application would probably get filed WPB.
|
| 
