My question is whether changing redundancy terms are allowed.
In 2001 my company was taken over and redundancy terms were protected under TUPE agreement.
In July 2003 my employer confirmed that 2000 staff would be made redundant as many jobs were being duplicated over two UK sites. The redundancies would be completed under the umbrella of a project and protected terms would apply throughout the timescale of the project. The project end date was December 2004 and all employees displaced or made redundant prior to December 2004 would be guaranteed protected terms. All staff displaced or made redundant after December 2004 would receive the new company terms which, for under 35’s, are less than the protected terms.
In December 2003 I believe I should have been displaced, when fundamental changes were made to the department I worked for – Financial systems. Additionally had a follow up review of my work been completed in March or April 2004, I would have been displaced or advised of likely displacement. Notification of displacement during this timeframe would have provided me with protected severance terms.
Due to the volume and timescales of change within the company, there was a degree of uncertainty regarding how the volume and nature of my work in the long term, and the extent to which future testing would require accountancy skills. It was not possible to be certain of the ongoing requirement for my role but it was deemed as critical to retain the accountancy testing skills until the impact of new systems was fully understood. Whilst these systems were being implemented I was asked to undertake other work, where the volume of testing work was insufficient.
My HR department have stated that the business was not in a position to define final structures, volume of work and skills required until new systems had been implemented and until there was full understanding of the 2005 development portfolio. The management team have stated the earliest time that this would have been possible was during Quarter 3 of 2004.
HR have stated that they are therefore satisfied that prior to March 2005 the business had insufficient information to make a decision on the permanent requirement for my role and skills.
On this basis, they do not consider that it would have been appropriate to displace me in December 2003 or in the first quarter of 2004. Therefore although my role was removed as part of the transformation project, because it took nearly 18 months for management to make a decision regarding my future my protected redundancy terms have been removed. Is it correct that differing terms can apply due to management delays and indecision?
Julia Cordes
