You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Well, as of today it's my turn to go through the redundancy process.
Have been offered an agreement including an enhanced settlement based on meeting the terms within. One of these terms says I cannot enter into any discussions that may lead to employment before my termination date (in Aug). Personally I think that's a bit harsh, given as various recruiters and inhouse DMs are going be heading off to sunnier climes rather soon. Others will no doubt argue "Well, you're gonna get more money so that should tide you over when you start looking later." Anyway, I've raised this with HR and will hopefully get that part quashed.
Now though, I need to seek legal aid on the agreement in full and wondered if the hive mind can recommend anyone.
Cheers all
Legal aid for an employment issue? My reaction is that 'you'll be lucky' given the cuts the service has had in recent years. I'd check here;
https://www.gov.uk/check-legal-aid
then go to a CAB.
Golden handcuffs for a period. Trying to manage you bailing out which is ironic if your post is redundant then it's cearly not required.....
But anyway. have a look at your house insurance and see what it covers legal advice wise.
Jodie Hill at Thrive Law
Call our office: 0113 8698101
Email: jodie.hill@thrivelaw.co.uk
Address: 15 Queen Square, Leeds LS2 8AJ
Isn't your CV already out there due to the uncertainty at work? Isn't your linked in already set to looking?
It's not a discussion to be available.
One of these terms says I cannot enter into any discussions that may lead to employment before my termination date (in Aug).
Does it say you can't look for new work before termination date - or you can't take another job before your termination date?
I'd be looking but make it clear to recruiters that you can't start any new job before 'x' date.
IMO - If you choose to leave before termination date, then that's your choice and you can say goodbye to any redundancy. You've just moved jobs.
cannot enter into any discussions that may lead to employment before my termination date (in Aug).
So are you not allowed to discuss any job that may start before Aug, or you're simply not allowed to discuss new employment at all until you're out? That seems really, and pointlessly harsh.
goodbye to any redundancy.
I suppose that might be the point, you only need a couple of people to jump at a job starting now rather than waiting a month a potentially missing it - save you a couple of grand.
How they'd police it is anyone's guess.
Isnt this fairly standard? They arent saying you cant start looking, just that if you start a new job before your end date you dont get your payout - you would in effect be resigning.
Sounds fair enough to me, redundancy is there to cover period of unemployment. If you choose to start a new job before your old one ends you don't tecnically need redundancy. If you can swing it to start the new job the day after you are due to finish then you are quids in, if not then you have a choice to make.
Cheers all for the speedy replies.
To clarify, I am being asked to avoid even speaking to anyone about a future role until my time here is up.
Re solicitor, I'll initially pick up the tab but employer will then cover it.
You'd be mad not to be 'entering discussions', Which would you rather have, a slightly enhanced redundancy deal or a new post lined up?
Fine, if you move into a new role before your termination date, they can keep their money, although TBH changing jobs is something you do at your own pace through choice, redundancy is to suit them, so it's not quite the same in my book.
Look for work, keep schtum about it. If they insist on having you before August, it's not the end of the world.
Just to be clear, I will not start a new role until after my termination date. But naturally I'm keen to start having conversations.
I cannot enter into any discussions that may lead to employment before my termination date
If it's worded like that then it doesn't preclude you entering into discussions provided you make it clear at the outset you couldn't take on a new role until after your leaving date.
^^^ That's how I read it too.
I'd say the punctuation is key:
"you cannot enter into any discussion that leads to employment, before your leave date"
is not the same as
"you cannot enter into any discussion that leads to employment before your leave date"
The former is lunacy, the latter is fine.
Plus its materially different than:
I cannot enter into any discussions that may lead to employment after my termination date
Isnt this fairly standard? They arent saying you cant start looking, just that if you start a new job before your end date you dont get your payout – you would in effect be resigning.
Sounds fair enough to me, redundancy is there to cover period of unemployment. If you choose to start a new job before your old one ends you don’t technically need redundancy. If you can swing it to start the new job the day after you are due to finish then you are quids in, if not then you have a choice to make.
Not really, but I guess it depends on the employer. Some want to be as fair to the people they're letting go as possible - for example the first time I was made redundant, I requested and was given an earlier release date so I could start a new job, the only thing it cost me was the 6 weeks missed salary I could have kept for hanging around the place twiddling my thumbs or whatever.
It sounds like the OP was clear about the meaning in reality (though it was not clear from the way they wrote it initially). Even assuming he is right, it looks like a condition that invites contempt and I wouldn't entertain it for a minute unless the payoff was stupendously generous. It's simply not reasonable to force someone into enforced unemployment for any significant period, skills decline and the gap on the CV may cause a problem.
If you choose to start a new job before your old one ends you don’t technically need redundancy.
To flip that round as you don't make the person redundant, rather the role, so redundancy is compensation for that fact. If they reinstate the role then fair enough to not pay it, but getting a job elsewhere is just fortuitous, not indicative that the compensation is unnecessary.
but getting a job elsewhere is just fortuitous, not indicative that the compensation is unnecessary.
Is a nice way to think about it..... but it's not going to happen.
You can do a headcount reduction redundancy where the role may exit just less people doing them. The payment is an agreement that you will stick it out until your leaving date and a compensation.
For the OP if nobody wants to budge then just look on the quiet line interviews up for the week after you leave. This however does depend on size of the payout, how long will it keep you going and how much in demand are you - you should know this already though.
Crack on and find a job, just don't start it before your termination date else you will forego the redundancy package.
If they ever tried to sue you, then it would fail due to their poor use of English, plus they are hardly going to spend more money suing you when they are trying to get rid of you!
Is a nice way to think about it….. but it’s not going to happen.
Actually it depends on the company, some won't be dicks, but I agree it's not common.
If its a settlement agreement where you are being paid compensation to waive any future claims then you are legally entitled to obtain independent legal advise
To add, just been through this process and my employer paid my legal fees - it was capped.