Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Redundancy selection process

ches

LE
Chaps n lasses.

My coy has announced redundancies. Less that 20 & are using pools with scoring to select candidates. They have however said that I am in a unique role so am not being scored against others. While I am filling a role no one else in the coy does, all info we've found says that i should be in a pool of one & scored with the same matrix as my colleagues. A unique role process is applicable to one person being made redundant, not more than one.

Spoken to ACAS but the advisor may not have understood too clearly, can an employer use both methods of selection in the same redundancy process? If I can get a definitive answer over the BH weekend I can email the idiots & put them right.

Cheers
 
Normally, when a Company announces redundancies, this is towards the end of a review period.

The Company will already know what roles are going and who the most likely candidates are to be made redundant.

If I can get a definitive answer over the BH weekend I can email the idiots & put them right.

That will be one way of ensuring that you are right at the top of the redundancy list.
 

ches

LE
Normally, when a Company announces redundancies, this is towards the end of a review period.

The Company will already know what roles are going and who the most likely candidates are to be made redundant.



That will be one way of ensuring that you are right at the top of the redundancy list.

TBH I'm pretty sure I'm out the door regardless but if they are ******* up the process (their outsourced HR is a one man band muppet who has messed up lots of things but is cheap) then I can make sure a voluntary package is sweetened.
 
Having been obliged to go through the process with a lot of my drivers due to coronavirus the line I have been given is that you have a common process to selection across all staff and that you can justify your reasoning for that process then from an employers perspective you are fine.

In my case I have applied two different selection criteria, one for HGV drivers and one for van drivers. That is perfectly acceptable as it forms part of a skills based selection process.
It also means that during that process I decided that non of the hGV drivers will be made redundant as I need to keep hold of those skilled drivers. Van drivers are easier to replace if the world recovers from the apocalypse.

So if I understand your question correctly, yes, your employer can split you out and use a different criteria based on you having different skills to everyone else.

I've used different criteria for two groups of drivers based on their licences (effectively skill level) and its perfectly legitimate.
 
TBH I'm pretty sure I'm out the door regardless

While I am filling a role no one else in the coy does,

then I can make sure a voluntary package is sweetened.

Not picking up your train of thought here.

If you are the only one who is doing a particular role, that particular role has been identified for the chop. Then there is no voluntary package to be sweetened.

It will be a short and sweet, thanks for your time, here's your redundancy package, goodbye.
 

ches

LE
Not picking up your train of thought here.

If you are the only one who is doing a particular role, that particular role has been identified for the chop. Then there is no voluntary package to be sweetened.

It will be a short and sweet, thanks for your time, here's your redundancy package, goodbye.

Simple really. If they have screwed up, then I'll kick up a fuss with ACAS support by lodging a complaint, they cant afford the fuss nor the financial cost, they'll want me out with no bother. Fine with me & a bit more money gives me more flexibility & time to look elsewhere
 
Simple really. If they have screwed up, then I'll kick up a fuss with ACAS support by lodging a complaint, they cant afford the fuss nor the financial cost, they'll want me out with no bother. Fine with me & a bit more money gives me more flexibility & time to look elsewhere


Obviously I have no knowledge about your employer but I wouldn't bank on it being successful
They won't look at the cost of arguing with you. What they will look at it how much it will cost them to apply what they give to you if they then have to pay that to everybody else (because thats the way it works)
 
If you're the only person that can do the job and the job is going to carry on, how can they make you redundant?
If the job is going to be terminated, you are inevitably going to be made redundant unless they can redeploy you to a different job. Not sure what your legal argument would be based on.
In any event don't rely on being bunged extra cash to shut up and go away because if they enhance your package, everyone else's get enhanced as well, which is likely to be a showstopper
 
Simple really. If they have screwed up, then I'll kick up a fuss with ACAS support by lodging a complaint, they cant afford the fuss nor the financial cost, they'll want me out with no bother. Fine with me & a bit more money gives me more flexibility & time to look elsewhere

I'll highlight this for you again, on the information that you have posted.

If you are the only one who is doing a particular role, that particular role has been identified for the chop. Then there is no voluntary package to be sweetened.

It will be a short and sweet, thanks for your time, here's your redundancy package, goodbye.

There isn't really much to screw up on the information that you have given.

If the Company cannot afford a fuss or the financial cost, then look no further than Statuatory Redundancy Pay.
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
Simple really. If they have screwed up, then I'll kick up a fuss with ACAS support by lodging a complaint, they cant afford the fuss nor the financial cost, they'll want me out with no bother. Fine with me & a bit more money gives me more flexibility & time to look elsewhere

I doubt it'll work like that. You'll just get the statutory minimum (which ain't much) when a Compromise Agreement would almost certainly pay more. You only have leverage if it's constructive dismissal.

Also, you don't know what the future holds. I took redundancy from a JV and one of the partners has been a regular supplier of highly paid consultancies since I formed my own company. Business is about making money not making enemies. Slamming doors and telling people both their provenance and their fortune is an expensive and time-wasting luxury.
 
Personally, I'd spend the time phoning round contacts, polishing my CV and building a network on Linkedin rather than trying to screw my soon to be former employers... you never know when a good reference will come in handy.
 
Chaps n lasses.

My coy has announced redundancies. Less that 20 & are using pools with scoring to select candidates. They have however said that I am in a unique role so am not being scored against others. While I am filling a role no one else in the coy does, all info we've found says that i should be in a pool of one & scored with the same matrix as my colleagues. A unique role process is applicable to one person being made redundant, not more than one.

Spoken to ACAS but the advisor may not have understood too clearly, can an employer use both methods of selection in the same redundancy process? If I can get a definitive answer over the BH weekend I can email the idiots & put them right.

Cheers

It can be valid to use different selection criteria for different roles.
An earlier stage is likely to be assessing which roles are required following the change and how many within each role

eg as you have a specific role then you are in a group of one or a small group. Either your role is retained and you automatically remain or your role is not required and you are automatically selected for redundancy
Another role has more people today then are required tomorrow, they are grouped and scored against the criteria

From that the differing methods are valid.
There is the option of lumping everyone at risk together (Including you) and scoring the criteria, but the company may not be required to do that, and if your current role differed enough then you may be on a higher salary, not qualified / less experienced for the other role etc in which case it can be valid to not consider you for retention in other roles.
There may be the option of applying for other roles - but in the current climate redundancies are likely to be necessary to cut numbers rather than just restructuring ‘effieciencies’ and be less suitable to moving between differing roles


Setting up a selection pool
You should set up a 'selection pool' if you're planning to make one or more employees redundant. There may be exceptions to this if you've employed someone to carry out a very specific role.
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
Normally, when a Company announces redundancies, this is towards the end of a review period.

The Company will already know what roles are going and who the most likely candidates are to be made redundant.

Unfortunately, all the company has to do is use a fair scoring system for redundancies - the company will invariably use a scoring system that broadly gives the results it wants.

When I was made redundant from my previous job at a major software multinational about 5 years ago, one of the items I was marked down on was 'lack of retail knowledge'. Amusing because I wrote and delivered the internal training on how retail worked within that company. I had no intention of contesting my redundancy. The multinational gave redundancy payments well above the odds - and I knew the rather meaty payment would pay my mortgage off.

In my present company they made a chunk of a team redundant 18 months ago as part of a fairly meaningless restructuring exercise; people were invited to apply for jobs in the downsized team. The results of that process gave the results the company wanted and at least one highly capable person was made redundant because their face didn't fit. The company cutting off its nose to spite its face.

Redundancy can be a shock; I've been redundant three times in my career (which is now nearing its end). The initial few weeks after redundancy are black ones as you wonder when you'll get another job - and how the bills will be paid in the mean time. But redundancy can help long term; every time I've been made redundant, I've eventually snared a better job. Indeed, one of the redundancies prompted me to make a career change from metallurgy (a shrinking sector) to IT (a vibrant one). Which worked out to my advantage in the end.

Wordsmith
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
Unfortunately, all the company has to do is use a fair scoring system for redundancies - the company will invariably use a scoring system that broadly gives the results it wants.

When I was made redundant from my previous job at a major software multinational about 5 years ago, one of the items I was marked down on was 'lack of retail knowledge'. Amusing because I wrote and delivered the internal training on how retail worked within that company. I had no intention of contesting my redundancy. The multinational gave redundancy payments well above the odds - and I knew the rather meaty payment would pay my mortgage off.

In my present company they made a chunk of a team redundant 18 months ago as part of a fairly meaningless restructuring exercise; people were invited to apply for jobs in the downsized team. The results of that process gave the results the company wanted and at least one highly capable person was made redundant because their face didn't fit. The company cutting off its nose to spite its face.

Redundancy can be a shock; I've been redundant three times in my career (which is now nearing its end). The initial few weeks after redundancy are black ones as you wonder when you'll get another job - and how the bills will be paid in the mean time. But redundancy can help long term; every time I've been made redundant, I've eventually snared a better job. Indeed, one of the redundancies prompted me to make a career change from metallurgy (a shrinking sector) to IT (a vibrant one). Which worked out to my advantage in the end.

Wordsmith

Everyone should be made redundant once - it builds empathy and resilience.
 

ches

LE
Everyone should be made redundant once - it builds empathy and resilience.

I've been down this road 5 times, working in the design sector its a hazard of the job so I'm no stranger to it.

In response to other posters, I'm not trying to feck my employer over but they are notoriously bad for getting things wrong on the HR front. If they've ballsed things up a bit with this process then I'll put them right.
So my OP was a simple question regarding selecting redundancy candidates from both pools & from at least one unique role. My colleagues are being scored against each, I am not, I am not in a pool of one (as I think I should be based on info I've read), I have been told I am not being scored....as I am deemed to be in a unique role.
 
I'm not trying to feck my employer over but they are notoriously bad for getting things wrong on the HR front. If they've ballsed things up a bit with this process then I'll put them right.

You then say

My colleagues are being scored against each, I am not, I am not in a pool of one (as I think I should be based on info I've read), I have been told I am not being scored....as I am deemed to be in a unique role.

According to you.

1. You are in a unique role

2. You are the only one in the Company to do this role.

As part of the review process, that I mentioned above, If the unique role, that only you carry out, has been identified for the chop.

Then there really isn't anything to balls up. Role gone, you're gone ( although you could be offered another role ) At worst you will receive Statuatory Redundancy Pay, at best you will receive SRP and a bonus for being a good employee.
 
The only thing they can balls up really is the notification processes and timing.

Unique role identifies as no longer needed, you are going, as long as they give you statutory notice, correct letters at correct time then you have nothing going for you..
 

ches

LE
You then say



According to you.

1. You are in a unique role

2. You are the only one in the Company to do this role.

As part of the review process, that I mentioned above, If the unique role, that only you carry out, has been identified for the chop.

Then there really isn't anything to balls up. Role gone, you're gone ( although you could be offered another role ) At worst you will receive Statuatory Redundancy Pay, at best you will receive SRP and a bonus for being a good employee.

Therein lies the rub. All the guidance found so far says that a unique role can be selected if there is only one role to be made redundant. But there are up to 15 jobs going across the company. So, colleagues are in various pools & being scored. All the info I've found says that a pool of one should therefore be used for the likes of me....using the same scoring. I also have interchangeable skills that match those of someone else in the company.

So it just comes down to the simple question, with the same redundancy process can the two types of selection, unique role & pools, be used. That's the info I cant find esp via auntie Google. Bit stuck until week starts proper & I can call a legal bod but thought it worth a try if we had any resident solicitors here.
 
So it just comes down to the simple question, with the same redundancy process can the two types of selection, unique role & pools, be used. That's the info I cant find esp via auntie Google. Bit stuck until week starts proper & I can call a legal bod but thought it worth a try if we had any resident solicitors here.

You are clutching at straws and refuse to believe what is written above.

It really, really is this simple.

Role gone, you're gone. ( As you are the only one in this role )

This is what will happen.

1. At best, you will be offered another role on different T&C's.

2. At worst, you will be handed SRP and guided out the door.
 

Latest Threads

Top