Company closing to fire staff

[hsync34]

Hi everyone,

I'd like to share my experience with a recent redundancy process and get some advice or insights. I was part of a UK-based team for a global company that recently decided to close its UK entity. While the process appeared to follow standard redundancy procedures on the surface, I feel that some key aspects raise questions about its fairness and transparency.

Late last year, we were informed that the UK entity would be closing, and a consultation process began. The company emphasized that they were looking to explore all options, but from my experience, it seemed the outcome was predetermined.

During the consultation, the following stood out:

1. Predetermined Outcome: It felt like the process was more about formalities than genuinely exploring alternatives. No meaningful efforts were made to identify roles within the UK.
2. Relocation to Germany: I was told my only option was to relocate to Germany at my own expense for a role that differed significantly from my previous one. Throughout the process the company went back and forth between telling me that I failed an interview and later saying it was available again. Very little details regarding compensation, etc, the majority of the details only provided on the 27th of December (I was made redundant on the 31st) leaving me with limited options to explore legal matters. This didn't feel like a genuine or practical alternative, especially given the costs and logistics involved.
3. No UK Role Exploration: The company continues to maintain a sales presence in the UK and two of the more senior colleagues were offered contractor roles to partially work as needed, which leads me to believe the operations didn't really stop.

Broader Company Actions

While the company dissolved its legal entity in the UK, it will also be closing subsidiaries in other countries, such as the Netherlands / Germany. They will retain chosen people through employers of record in Germany and the colleagues doing contractor work in the UK. As you all can imagine, since this brings a conflict of interest, there is limited communication with colleagues still active in the company.

I had a chat with a lawyer and was told that this would likely fit under Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd. as if the company was closing the outcome would be the same - however I think this is different is because the company has European sales teams covering UK customers and the senior workers were offered contracting roles, which tells me the company is planning to reduce it's operations but nor completely stop them, leaving me at odds that this pushed redundancy wasn't fair.

I was willing to consider other opportunities and roles, but throughout the process there was zero negotiation

Note: The company has less than 20 employees in the UK and it's subsidiaries.

Questions for the Forum

1. Is it common for companies to claim closure while retaining certain functions like sales teams or contractors?
2. Should they have made more effort to explore alternative roles, especially in the same region?
3. Do I have any rights for claim for unfair dismissal?

Thank you for any advice or feedback on whether this process was handled fairly or if there is anything I should have been offered differently.

[ULA]

Can I ask a couple of questions before responding to your questions:

1. What was your role in the company?
2. How long had you been employed?
3. Are the contracting roles on a self-employed basis or via the employer of record?

[hsync34]

Thanks for your questions.

1. What was your role in the company?

** I was an application Engineer

2. How long had you been employed?

** 4.5 Years.

3. Are the contracting roles on a self-employed basis or via the employer of record?

** Not an employer of record, as those are for full time members of staff (example, abroad). From what I know they were meant to open their own company and charge our company for subsequent hours conducted after retirement, as part of the work conducted after the *official* closure. The majority of the technical equipment on the lab was therefore under discussions to be taken to their houses, so as to act as a home lab when the facilities finally close. Unfortunatelly i don't have many details on the exact specifics regarding this. The last discussions I heard were about the going rate and the payment of a rental to have the equipment at home. The company didn't want to pay for legal help, so it's possible an NDA was not in place, but I have not been told by the colleagues about particular arrangments thereafter.

[ULA]

Thank you for your responses and I can answer the questions raised in your initial post as follows:

1. It is not the first time that global companies have closed down an entity based in the UK and made redundancies for certain roles/functions but kept some sales activity in place.

2. An employer has to explore opportunities in their current operations, clearly the UK was being slimmed down to just a sales operation under a completely difference structure as you have set out in post #3 with no registered company presence. If they have no company presence then it would be very hard for them to offer you an alternative position.

3. With the limited information you have provided I would say there is not a claim for unfair dismissal, particularly if your role as an application engineer is no longer required. I would also defer to a solicitor who has advised you of this.