Redundancy….

[Moscow Mule]

Depending on the %age of workforce being let go, they might not have to do the whole scoring thing.

[lukemg]

Been involved in this a couple of times from the mgmt side. Thing that struck me is that it was all completely sorted out from the company side, who they wanted, new org chart, how they would score it all to make the outcome match what they wanted, who would handle the discussions etc etc etc. Way before they let anyone affected know.
Then they claim its all under construction, everyone will be given a fair chance etc.
When this does happen it often gives good opportunities to some people who are favoured. As a contractor its easy to say take the cash and run but it can be a nightmare for the people involved.

[eek]

Been involved in this a couple of times from the mgmt side. Thing that struck me is that it was all completely sorted out from the company side, who they wanted, new org chart, how they would score it all to make the outcome match what they wanted, who would handle the discussions etc etc etc. Way before they let anyone affected know.
Then they claim its all under construction, everyone will be given a fair chance etc.
When this does happen it often gives good opportunities to some people who are favoured. As a contractor its easy to say take the cash and run but it can be a nightmare for the people involved.

But having been there and done that, the best advice is to accept it and get on with the next stage of your life.

Yes it ain't pleasant but any other approach will lead to greater mental problems.

[psychocandy]

Agree with what escapeUK says. Yes, there are laws and they've got to do it properly, follow the procedure, do the selection thing etc.

But, basically, its all bollacks. Companies can get rid of who they want because they know they can pay lip service to doing it properly. Yeh they make sure they follow the procedure and do all the paperwork, at risk etc.

Also, they know that they can offer a little more money, and get staff to sign a compromise agreement anyway.

Been made redundant 4 times in 10 years from permie jobs so I've seen a bit of it. Got a solicitor friend whos an employment law specialist and a few times I've engaged him.

Small company whos MD turned up one day and said sorry mate. Couldn't even be arsed to find out correct procedure. Mate got me an extra months pay out of that one.

Another place decided me and a few others were going to suspended unless we signed compromise agreement. Mate advised me to take the extra money. Not worth taking further.

Big multi-national. Looked like they did it all properly but they didnt really. I volunteered and signed compromise to get more money.

Bottom line is if companies want you gone thats it. You might be able to screw them for a bit more but basically thats it.

My current client is the same. Loads of redundancies but the contractors are rolling in. Permies = head count, contractors dont count. LOL. Suits me for now.

[vetran]

yep there is only one important party in this - YOU.

They are stiffing you make sure get the maximum you can. Take Garden leave if you can, don't go to the wire working yourself into an early grave, they won't thank you.

Also its 3 months for it to go tits up and which increases the chance of you being hired back on a suitable day rate to fix. I trebled my day rate to pop in and do 10 minutes of work. result.

[DodgyAgent]

Some advice:

Get an agent and prepare a list of all your contacts and then hand them over. Your career will take off

[speling bee]

Some advice:

Get an agent and prepare a list of all your contacts and then hand them over. Your career will take off

+1

PM Dodgy your manager's and HR lead's names and he'll take it from there.

[northernladuk]

Didn't read all the responses but remember they must make the role redundant not the person. If they get rid of you and someone steps in to your boots they are breaking the law.

Of course it is much more complicated than that but that is a good basis to understand if this is right or not.

[OwlHoot]

Been involved in this a couple of times from the mgmt side. Thing that struck me is that it was all completely sorted out from the company side, who they wanted, new org chart, how they would score it all to make the outcome match what they wanted, who would handle the discussions etc etc etc. Way before they let anyone affected know.
Then they claim its all under construction, everyone will be given a fair chance etc.
When this does happen it often gives good opportunities to some people who are favoured. As a contractor its easy to say take the cash and run but it can be a nightmare for the people involved.

Mass layoffs are also usually completely disconnected from any consideration of the relative merits and experience of employees. So they'll often let key people go, and keep muppets who one might think would be first for the chop.

A last in first out policy, to minimize redundancy costs, obviously has the side effect of tending to keep experienced staff. But gaining that advantage is purely coincidental.

[Sausage Surprise]

Wilmslow has just left the building.
Expect the imminent return of Wilmslow.