Tweet
Scenario.
An senior employee is approached by a competitor (non sales role) based on a previous application. Following long rigorous process, employee accepts conditional offer. Conditions confirmed met, employee starts new position, a few hours in employee informed there’s been a mistake, no headcount, role doesn’t exist, employee asked to leave. 4 days later employee receives a letter implying they are to be made redundant. It states redundancy payment in monies to be paid.
Received conflicting advice, ACAS state there is a case, wrongful dismissal, options = breach of contract / settlement agreement. Employment lawyer states paying notice is enough.
I presume therefore this is a moral case as opposed to legal one? They are using both probation notice clause and redundancy in a way to which they are not intended. It’s not a true redundancy as no one else has been considered for redundancy.
Any advice would be warmly welcomed and gratefully received.
An senior employee is approached by a competitor (non sales role) based on a previous application. Following long rigorous process, employee accepts conditional offer. Conditions confirmed met, employee starts new position, a few hours in employee informed there’s been a mistake, no headcount, role doesn’t exist, employee asked to leave. 4 days later employee receives a letter implying they are to be made redundant. It states redundancy payment in monies to be paid.
Received conflicting advice, ACAS state there is a case, wrongful dismissal, options = breach of contract / settlement agreement. Employment lawyer states paying notice is enough.
I presume therefore this is a moral case as opposed to legal one? They are using both probation notice clause and redundancy in a way to which they are not intended. It’s not a true redundancy as no one else has been considered for redundancy.
Any advice would be warmly welcomed and gratefully received.
Comment