Redundancy question

I have been made redundant twice from large banks.

On both occasions, I was shown a letter with the statutory minimum terms laid out... BUT, there was a 2nd letter with enhanced terms which were available if I signed a compromise agreement.

They paid the cost to consult a solicitor, so I took it to one in Worthing (the same one I used for both) and signed it.

Clearly I can't mention either companies, as I signed the comp agreement.

The most recent time, I was on 3 month's notice, so I got a 1 month consultation period, 3 months (taxed) payment in lieu of notice (effectively the summer off paid) and a generous lump sum. I was happy.

In terms of the psychological effect is concerned, the 1st time it happened it shook me quite a bit, and I didn't see it coming at all - however, the 2nd time I was older, wiser and having been through it before I was aware it was possible, and it was much simpler.

Hope it goes well for you, fella.

Two Professors said:

Good luck,been there three times,never pleasant.The good people at ACAS gave me excellent,free advice so worth looking on t'Internet.They knew the process from top to bottom,and offered intervention,if needed.Hope that's still on the go.

Click to expand...

I can honestly say, in 2002, after 25 years of service, in a job which had changed beyond recognition, redundancy was the best thing that had ever happened to me, in my career. I got a great lump sum, and as I was over 50, my pension kicked in too.

Obviously, it was right time, right place, but it was pleasant.

I'm sorry you are potentialy incorrect with this statement. At risk means means exactly that and no more. I do not know your exact circumstances but if there are say ten engineers all doing the same or similar roles and your company are looking to lose one engineer, then all ten engineers would be put at risk pending either a solution being put forward on how the reduction could be avoided or a selection process identifying the candidate.

Saying that if you are a stand alone post i.e. you are the only engineer, then the situation is somewhat graver. As for your continuous service query, the payment is based on your current role/salary/terms and conditions and if aged 21 - 41 the minimum entitlement is one weeks salary per complete year of service i.e. in this case 2006 capped to 20 years service. if over 41 the minimum payment is 1.5 weeks salary per completed year capped at 20 years. i believe those on zero hours contracts now enjoy the same protection as those on say 40 hour contracts. Hope that assists.

Blue Valkyrie said:

Sorry to say that 'at risk' is just code for 'you are gone'.

Been there myself, things were rocky for a while and like for most people it eventually worked out well in the end.

Not sure about your dates though.

Click to expand...

It's a removal of a role (and job description) affecting 8 or so people. Then there is a new role being created, of which there are 2 positions.

And it's not a role I can geographically cover as I don't drive and would be impossible by public transport or bicycle.

However, this is a "consultation" period with the 8 roles identified as "at risk"

it's cost cutting to save the company. My main concerns​ are the direct affect on vulnerable clients and then personally, not getting screwed over or pushed out without getting some redundancy (even though it's not much , as statutory).