The Big Lottery has recently issued a statement on offering Lottery funded posts to staff facing redundancy. It reads:

“Our terms and conditions mean that, even though there may be internal candidates, the grant recipient must advertise externally. Internal candidates can, of course, apply and, if the match in competencies is close, may well be likely to be offered the job. However we do not permit an internal applicant to be merely slotted in.
It is true that the Employment Act states that employers must consider available and suitable alternative employment for employees likely to be made redundant. However, having considered it in the context of our grant and the terms and conditions relating to it, employers should dismiss it as a consideration, since to do otherwise would lead to a breach of our terms and conditions. Newly funded posts through BIG are not available to them as ‘alternative employment’ because they would not exist at all unless funded by BIG and our terms and conditions require open recruitment.
This policy of open and fair recruitment for new project posts is important and is in place to ensure that all applicants are treated consistently.”
My understanding is that an employer must offer to staff any suitable alternative jobs to avoid redundancy, regardless of how the funding for the post is obtained. I would have thought that Employment Law takes precedence over the Lottery’s own conditions and that the Lottery may be in breach of the Unfair Terms Act 1977. Any advice would be appreciated.

Phil Bagnall

Thank you! Your subscription has been confirmed. You'll hear from us soon.