I posted this by accident on the Welcome Forum! My apologies for the duplicate post- will try now and get the original thread deleted!
I would be grateful for your advice on the following situation. ACAS have been great at providing general advice but not answers to specific questions. My friend hasn't been a member of a TU long enough to be eligible for their help.
My friend works in a reputable college providing learning support for students with additional learning needs. She was advised a couple of weeks ago that her role was at risk of redundancy and that a second meeting would be arranged to make a decision on her redundancy. We assumed this would be the final consultation meeting where formal notice of her redundancy would be given. They claim the role was expanding and they now need someone with certain training that my friend doesn't have. When my friend asked about being trained for the new role, they suggested that she'd have to fund it herself, and that she now needs to go away and consider steps she can take to avoid redundancy (that she was obligated to do this). In the meantime, they publish the new vacancy with a very short closing date (a month from the first meeting). A few days later she requested to be sent their written redundancy policy but was told that they didn't have one since it wasn't a legal requirement. The advert was removed later that day. She attended the second meeting and presenting numerous steps she had taken to avoid redundancy including numerous options for the college to consider. They claimed that they would go away and consider one of these options - this particular option would require the college to fund my friend's training which they made clear wasn't an option in the first meeting. We asked at this meeting why the advert was published pre-emptively and were told this was a glitch and they apologised a few times. When we asked about being told a final decision on the redundancy would be made at this meeting, they were quick to claim this was a misunderstanding. They have now arranged for a third meeting.
My questions are as follows:
1. When we asked them if there was any other restructuring or redundancies being made elsewhere in the college, we were told they were not able to share this with us. Does my friend have a right to know if hers is the sole redundancy being made at the college?
2. While my friend presented numerous options she'd considered to avoid redundancy, the college presented none. When pushed they mentioned vaguely how they've checked vacancies at the college and their sister colleges but this was all very general, and was mentioned only on questioning. They did however ask my friend if she'd looked at vacancies outside the college, in particular in primary schools for a minimum wage position that has no relevance to her experience and skill set. This seems outside the remit of my friend's obligation to demonstration steps taken to avoid redundancy, and pushes her to prove how she's avoiding unemployment. Are they allowed to ask this?
3. Are they obliged to send the audio recording of the meeting and minutes after the meeting without her asking?
4. Can we use their lack of written policy in anyway? The process does not appear fair or transparent, but not just for my friend. They themselves seem to have backtracked on at least 2 issues so far.
Thank you so much for reading and I would be so grateful for any advice or guidance you can provide. Thank you so much!
I would be grateful for your advice on the following situation. ACAS have been great at providing general advice but not answers to specific questions. My friend hasn't been a member of a TU long enough to be eligible for their help.
My friend works in a reputable college providing learning support for students with additional learning needs. She was advised a couple of weeks ago that her role was at risk of redundancy and that a second meeting would be arranged to make a decision on her redundancy. We assumed this would be the final consultation meeting where formal notice of her redundancy would be given. They claim the role was expanding and they now need someone with certain training that my friend doesn't have. When my friend asked about being trained for the new role, they suggested that she'd have to fund it herself, and that she now needs to go away and consider steps she can take to avoid redundancy (that she was obligated to do this). In the meantime, they publish the new vacancy with a very short closing date (a month from the first meeting). A few days later she requested to be sent their written redundancy policy but was told that they didn't have one since it wasn't a legal requirement. The advert was removed later that day. She attended the second meeting and presenting numerous steps she had taken to avoid redundancy including numerous options for the college to consider. They claimed that they would go away and consider one of these options - this particular option would require the college to fund my friend's training which they made clear wasn't an option in the first meeting. We asked at this meeting why the advert was published pre-emptively and were told this was a glitch and they apologised a few times. When we asked about being told a final decision on the redundancy would be made at this meeting, they were quick to claim this was a misunderstanding. They have now arranged for a third meeting.
My questions are as follows:
1. When we asked them if there was any other restructuring or redundancies being made elsewhere in the college, we were told they were not able to share this with us. Does my friend have a right to know if hers is the sole redundancy being made at the college?
2. While my friend presented numerous options she'd considered to avoid redundancy, the college presented none. When pushed they mentioned vaguely how they've checked vacancies at the college and their sister colleges but this was all very general, and was mentioned only on questioning. They did however ask my friend if she'd looked at vacancies outside the college, in particular in primary schools for a minimum wage position that has no relevance to her experience and skill set. This seems outside the remit of my friend's obligation to demonstration steps taken to avoid redundancy, and pushes her to prove how she's avoiding unemployment. Are they allowed to ask this?
3. Are they obliged to send the audio recording of the meeting and minutes after the meeting without her asking?
4. Can we use their lack of written policy in anyway? The process does not appear fair or transparent, but not just for my friend. They themselves seem to have backtracked on at least 2 issues so far.
Thank you so much for reading and I would be so grateful for any advice or guidance you can provide. Thank you so much!
Comment