Redundancy - is this fair?

**Java24** · 24th August 2020, 21:48:PM

Apologies the first part should have read, I returned to my work based last Monday and was asked to ‘have a chat’

**Java24** · 25th August 2020, 19:58:PM

If anyone can help I’d be really grateful, I’ve got a second meeting coming up soon.

I just wanted to add it’s not the criteria I necessarily disagree with although attitude and flexibility feels subjective. It’s the fact my scoring seems unreasonably unfair especially when they have been unable to provide evidence and during my first meeting stated in my opinion x, y and z several times.

i have a colleague who has been in service 2 years less than myself, same training, around 20-30 day’s sickness, a disciplinary for calling the director a d*ck and who does less overtime than myself. It’s hard to quantify why I’ve receive a 0 in overtime and flexibility. Additionally seems marginally unfair the sickness policy changed and those who were offered to take annual leave to avoid bei n unpaid for their sickness haven’t had Th is counted, surely they should only count absence since they changed the policy to apply it fairly!

**ULA** · 25th August 2020, 20:54:PM

Sorry not to respond sooner but we are all volunteers on the forum and we provide our support around other activities and jobs.

I presume that the company is making less than 20 redundancies?

In terms of my perspective on a redundancy process it is unusual to be told that the company is making redundancies and you are in the "at risk pool" as well as you have been provisionally selected for redundancy as a result of a selection criteria scoring in the same meeting. They would normally be split over two meetings.

As part of your next consultation meeting I would suggest that you get the person conducting the meeting to respond to the following:

why they need to make redundancies, if they have not already given the reasons
why they’re considering you for redundancy
how they came to the scoring for you against each criteria and if you do not think they gave you the right score/s explain why not
ask what other jobs are available that you can apply for in order to avoid redundancy
ask then any other questions you may have about the process and what happens next

The meeting is also a chance to explain why you shouldn’t be made redundant. Tell them if you don’t think they’re following their process properly or if you believe they have chosen you unfairly. It is best to discuss unfairness now rather than waiting until your employer has made a final decision. By speaking to them early on you might persuade them not to make you redundant.

Hope this helps but if you have any further questions then please just come back to this thread.

**Java24** · 25th August 2020, 22:03:PM

Thank you I completely appreciate that and all the hard work you do

i was given the 3 letters one that was sent by email to the whole company (even those not at risk), the letter confirming that redundancies required as a result of not recovering financially from Covid yet (fair enough) and then a scoring sheet and another letter stating I was at risk and first meeting was Monday 24th. It stated The process would take approx 3 weeks but they couldn’t guarantee and they were looking into alternatives. The scoring had been done (no idea this was coming until handed the letter and scores) I had my own individual scoring sheet and my name in a table with employee 1-4 and their scores

in my meeting yesterday I queried a few things
- why is length of service up to 8-10 years when company has only been operating since 2014 and no one in the ‘pool’ has been here more than 5

- why is sickness up to 2 years (in most cases I’d agree that were reasonable) but given the policy changed 20 months ago from paid sickness to unpaid, those who have taken since were given the option to take annual leave instead meaning their sickness wasn’t counted. This seems unfair from the point of view that anyone before the policy change wouldn’t opt to take annual leave because the were paid for any sickness absence - in my opinion that skews the outcome

- finally, the attitude and flexibility. Comments were made around my inflexibility to do overtime (I presented all my records which were 210 days out of 375 days (over 50%), I brought into question what was meant by my attitude when that’s never been address before, no conduct issues, no disciplinaries, excellent appraisals etc.

I was told for most of the above that they would ‘look at the scores’ but even if they changed x, y or z it wouldn’t change make much difference or change the out one/scores etc overall! Seemed a bit pre judged to me, as how would you know that until you looked.

they never advised how many people they are making redundant I’m guessing one (me), no one else has had a meeting or been given scores etc. They said this was my first consultation meeting to discuss the matrix etc and put forward any suggestions.

The director who led the meeting stated on many occassions ‘it’s my opinion or in my opinion’ again they advised in the letter they used objective and quantifiable data but his opinion doesn’t feel very objective. I asked for documents to back up some of these things and was advised for some of them they don’t hold formal staff records so I don’t know how they will have decided some of this info for scoring without using their opinion only. This same director sent me a text message a few months ago telling me he didn’t want to lose me and I was the highest paid driver for a reason.

3 days before my ‘chat’ where I was given the letters and scores, I had asked in the group chat with my manager and colleagues if our bonus scheme was still in operation as All the documentation had been removed. I was told by one of the directors son (who is a colleague) that I was lucky to have a job, maybe coincidence but his parent 1 of 2 directors was jointly responsible for scoring me lowest for possible redundancy.

since February I have raised a couple of health and safety issues or declined to do things related to health and safety concerns and have also asked about paying holiday pay on overtime which was ignored.

i believe I am seen as somewhat the ‘awkward one’ but not intentionally just merely because I’m not willing to risk my life or injure myself and I believe im within my rights to query holiday pay or simply ask a question about a bonus scheme. Obviously I cannot prove that this is why I was scored lowest but assume it has a direct impact.

ultimately what I’m really struggling with is, I have colleagues (again I appreciate I should worry about myself not my colleagues) who have had 20-30 days sick, less overtime than myself, less in terms of length of service and also disciplinary records - one of which for calling one of the directors a d*ck, how this person scored higher than me on attitude and flexibility seems unfair.

I just can’t see how the scoring is fair, surely to warrant a zero on attitude and flexibility for example there’d have to be something if not a number of things that would have been addressed over the past 5 years if it was that critical to business and I’d not been displaying those at a satisfactory standard?

I’ve obviously challenged all these things and have a further consultation meeting Thursday however I’ve accepted I’m likely to be made redundant, I don’t however wish to drop the fact I think it’s unfair so can I challenge this? Can I ask directly if the fact I’ve brought up challenges/questions relating to overcharging customers/health and safety/bonus etc has it had an impact on the decision being made?

many thanks

**ULA** · 25th August 2020, 22:29:PM

At the meeting on Thurs there is no reason why you cannot go over the scores you have been given, having had time to reflect on them since the last meeting and challenge how you have been scored giving examples of where you feel these are unfair in comparison to other colleagues.

If you feel the other factors may have had an impact on the overall score, even though they are unrelated to the criteria used, then you can ask about this.

**Java24** · 25th August 2020, 23:45:PM

Thank you.

the other factors are unrelated to the scores in that sense but I do feel that they have influenced by lowest score.

Everything I’m reading online suggest the criteria should as far as possible be objective. My organisation are unable to provide documents that do not correspond with the scores and have even noted a few times about this being in their opinion. If they are not willing to consider changing the scores is this not something I’d have a fair chance of appealing or taking further?

sorry for all the questions buts it’s difficult to comprehend that after working there for 5 years I am
suddenly the lowest scoring yet I have nothing negative on my record to reflect it and everything else ie appraisals etc is all glowingly positive?

many thanks

**MIKE770** · 26th August 2020, 08:18:AM

trouble as history shows (I know) when they make their minds up no matter questions/answers they tend (do) invoke situations over time and as in my case and others make life so complicated they get their way in the end = the end user is oneself, try and get another job = no hassle no bad feeling and a piece of mind! know a friend who was in hospital also was told by the said company that:- not fit to get back to work for a large company, yes on a hospital bed very ill/recovery, sacked him in plain words, so I organised a Tribunal case through trade union for him? when questioned by panel chairman the company representative stated that the claimant will not be able to work again? the chairman asked the representative:- are you referring to Mr cccccc? yes they stated Oh! he is a county court usher at these premises? just an insight to some companies methods!

**ULA** · 26th August 2020, 09:48:AM

You are correct a selection criteria matrix should be objective and depending on what criteria used e.g. sick days, disciplinary etc these should be evidenced by accurate records and information for all employees affected. It is good practice but not always carried out to have another manager review the scores to ensure that bias has not crept into the scoring.

Although not a legal requirement for there to be the right of appeal in a redundancy situation, most companies will adopt good practice and allow for an appeal as part of the process. However i would try and make the best attempt to challenge your scores at the meeting tomorrow rather than leave it to any appeal.

**Java24** · 27th August 2020, 13:43:PM

Hi Ula

Thank you. The meeting happened today. To summarise, despite me challenging the scoring this hasn't changed

Length of service - top scores being 5 points which are unobtainable for anyone as no one has been there 8-10 years - this was not addressed.

Attendance - scored over a 2 year period, but 20 months ago the policy from being paid sickness absence changed to being unpaid. Anyone who has taken sickness absence in the last 20 months has opted to take annual leave to avoid being off sick with no pay. I challenged this as unfair as if the policy had not changed their absence would have been counted/I would have been in the boat of not being paid for my absence and therefore this may have been taken as annual leave.

They stated it could not be proven I would have taken annual leave and I had the option to take annual leave (Not sure why I would have used my annual leave entitlement when I was being paid for my absence)

Attitude and flexibility - this was scored over 4 points, client feedback (they stated on monday this was via telephone and a well known review site), inflexibility on overtime, (it was acknowledged on Monday my overtime was restricted), maintenance of equipment and attitude to colleagues

According to records, I am the second lowest on late finishes and the lowest on early starts. They took all other people scored (incl one person not scored) and done an average of their overtime - should this not be done on an individual basis? Out of the 5 people scored, two have children and the other three do not. They are aware I have a child I do not live with that I only have set days and times agreed to be able to see (which isn't that much). The comment today was People's home life is irrelevant; it can only be judged on what is performed from a business point of view and operationally. We can only judge on what you do at work. Surely though it is unfair to compare a subjective criteria like this on 5 people when most of them don't have children?

Client feedback - on Monday and noted in my meeting notes it is advised that although there is no negative feedback, there is also no directly positive feedback that mentions my name. In the meeting and notes it states this feedback is received via telephone and also via a well known review site. I checked this website and 2 reviews have been made the past 12 months (doesn't mention any names). Of the 73 reviews, over 30 were made in a period of time (18 months) when it was only myself and another colleague and the other 3 people were not working at the company. A comment with positive feedback whereby it mentions a name has not been received since 2016. As soon as I mentioned this today, they came up with two calls they had received on 4 July and 16 August that specifically asked for me not to attend a job - I can't help but wonder why this came up when I queried the online, public viewing review site that challenged Monday's comment, but also directly contradicts Monday's comment of not having negative feedback (I couldn't think of this quick enough at the time to address). I find this difficult to believe and obviously a phone call there is no evidence - Can I challenge this and if so how?

Overall I think the process has been unfair for the following reasons
* I was the only one called for 'a chat' as it was worded to be given three letters around needing to make redundancies, the score sheet (showing I scored lowest) and details of my meeting. I feel like a group chat as a whole to advise there was a need for redundancies, how many etc would have been more appropriate. The letter advising of possible redundancies was sent to all, after I got out of my 'chat'
* The criteria wasn't consulted on, I was just handed a scoring sheet.
* Even to date I haven't actually been told how many redundancies there will be (it is obviously clear it is one given I have been the only one given scores, had meetings etc) but I feel like that should have been clearly communicated either in the letter, 'chat' or first consultation meeting. I haven't been told the process of what will be happening, just a 3 weeks is our best estimate, no kind of redundancy statement showing what I'd be entitled to etc.
* I don't feel I have had any support from the organisation. In the meeting Monday I was told, in the managers opinion and what he believes the rest of my colleagues would think, I am not a team player, my attitude is poor and i'm inflexible. It is obviously emotive and difficult to hear given I really don't believe that and especially as I have never had such conversation or any related conduct or disciplinary issues.

What I find most difficult is that apparently this is the criteria that is so important to the organisation and yet if I am so poor and below average why has this not been addressed? Would you expect it to have been addressed.

I think attitude and flexibility is subjective and based on opinion and my manager who conducted the meeting did say in the meeting a few times 'in my opinion' so clearly is based upon opinion. Additionally, when challenging the scores on Monday it is noted 4 times in my meeting that 'I will have a look at this but it won't make a difference' again surely you wouldn't have known it wouldn't make a difference until you checked?

I am really at a loss at what to do, I don't want the job as I feel it would be untenable now, I have accepted the fact I will be made redundant, however the whole process feels unfair and feel like this demonstrates me in a light that a) I don't feel I am and b) has been personal c) unfair on the basis that all of the negative things that have been stated have never been addressed with me, have minimal evidence and certainly nothing I have seen (unless on the phone)

Can you please give me any advice on where I could go from here. The meeting was left that they will be in touch - i've challenged aspects both in Monday and todays meeting (2nd consultation meeting).

Many thanks

**ULA** · 27th August 2020, 18:03:PM

Assuming that they do not accept any of the challenges you have put forward in the last two meetings then I suspect the next correspondence will be to confirm that your job will be terminated due to redundancy. As per an earlier post I made, although not a legal requirement, many companies do at this stage allow an appeal to be made. In which case that would be your next course of action.

**Java24** · 27th August 2020, 18:24:PM

Thanks Ula

Thing is do you want to appeal if you don’t really want the job anymore? How can I stay in a job where I’ve been identified as having an unhelpful attitude, clients apparently not wanting me over others, lack of flexibility, not being a team player especially when none of it can be evidenced.

to be honest at this point is it worth me asking for a settlement agreement

on the balance of probability would any of this be deemed as unfair that I could potentially progress to acas with it?

**ULA** · 28th August 2020, 11:12:AM

If you did want to take the issue further i.e. ACAS then potentially a Tribunal, the latter would want to see that you have exhausted the internal procedure, so if you have the right to appeal that is what they would expect you to do.

If you did decide to take the matter further then these are some of the things you will need to consider. Your employer doesn’t have to follow the ACAS code when they made you redundant but they do have to make sure that the selection process for choosing you was fair.

The tribunal will look at whether:

there was a genuine need to make redundancies in your workplace
your employer followed a fair procedure for consulting the workforce and selecting people for redundancy
the decision to select you was fair
your employer made reasonable efforts to find you alternative employment elsewhere in the company

It would be these points that you would have to hang your case around and prove that this was not a genuine redundancy, the process was not fair, the decision to select you was unfair etc.

In regard to a settlement agreement (SA), these are normally instigated by the employer either because they are concerned their process is not robust enough to come under scrutiny from a Tribunal or on a commercial basis they want to be sure that a claim will not be coming their way, as by signing a SA, the individual is giving up their rights to make a claim. Sometimes the threat of taking the matter further by an employee to their employer will lead to them responding with a SA, sometimes it does not.

Redundancy - is this fair?

Redundancy - is this fair?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Announcement

Welcome to LegalBeagles

Court Claim ?