think i may have stuffed my chances of getting any redundancy pay

[eeewahwoowah]

my fixed term contract ends on march 31st and the project i am working on is being terminated due to lack of future funding.

i was notified verbally before christmas that this would be the case so was not unaware. at christmas it was mentioned that an admin job within the organisation would be coming up and if i were interested i could have it. i didn't want it for a range of reasons so i said no thank you. it was all very informal and nothing was said of it again.

only now on the eve of the formal meeting to discuss the termination of the project do i realise that by turning down this job i could have jeopardised the little bit of redundancy payment i might be owed. the only reason i know this is because i just read it on the directgov website. my employer did not mention this when the admin job was mooted.

i received written notification of the termination of the project last week and have a meeting tomorrow to formally discuss it. Another thing to note is that at no point has the word 'redundancy' been mentioned in this process.

so i have two concerns (1) that they do not consider this redundancy at all just the natural end of a fixed term contract and (2) that if they do i may have unwittingly done myself out of it anyway.

Any thoughts? I would appreciate any comments hugely.

[KatyMac]

How long was the fixed rate contract?

[eeewahwoowah]

i have had two one year fixed term contracts so i think i will be entitled to redundancy payment albeit the minimum. i can't say that i couldn't use the money though.

[KatyMac]

What date did you start?

Was there a break (even a day) between the 2

eg did one contract end on Friday & the other start on Monday?

[flowerybeanbag]

loving the name eeewah...

You are right to realise that whether something is called a 'fixed term' contract or not makes no difference in terms of your redundancy rights, so if your employment is potentially ending because funding for your post is running out, then your post is redundant, and as long as you have 2 years' unbroken service you are entitled to redundancy pay if nothing else suitable is found for you.

It is perfectly possible for someone to informally be aware that redundancy is on the horizon before they are formally notified and the whole formal process begins, but that doesn't mean that the formal process means any less iyswim. So the conversation before Christmas shouldn't affect anything too much, I don't think they could legitimately claim that you turned down a reasonable offer of suitable alternative employment if it was a verbal discussion before the formal process had begun.

Having said that, if that or another job is available and would be considered suitable, is offered as a potential alternative and you turn it down now, then you would certainly jeopardise your entitlement to redundancy.

If you've got a formal meeting tomorrow they should confirmt that your position is redundant and should talk to you about your options, which should include other positions which you could either apply for or they could redeploy you to, as well as the option of redundancy pay. See what they say will be the outcome of this end of contract. Just ending it isn't an option, if they consider that you have forfeited your right to redundancy I would say they were wrong, but certainly they should make that clear and enable you to challenge it.

[eeewahwoowah]

there was no break as such KatyMac. however when the first contract ended they did not provide us with another written contract for a period of 5 months! however they continued to pay us for that period and our work continued seamlessly and therefore i believe that we had an implied contract in the absence of a written one.

actually now you mention it, my job title changed from one contract to the next (i was promoted) and our work did change slightly due to restrictions placed on us by the funding we received for our second contract. however, it was a very messy situation, at the time and my employer acted extremely shoddily. in any case, perhaps these changes alone might mean that i am not entitled to redundancy pay.

[flowerybeanbag]

eeewah just seen your response to katymac, changes you mention make no difference and neither does lack of written contract extension.

[eeewahwoowah]

hi flowery! it's edward woodward without the d's dontchaknow.

thanks for that, i think you are right that they don't have a legitimate claim based on the pre-christmas offer. there are no other opportunities in the organisation at the moment though.

i will get a full picture of the situation at the meeting tomorrow. but in light of the issues around my contracts i think i may be out of luck on the unbroken thingy.

Still all will be revealed tomorrow hopefully.

[eeewahwoowah]

ooh X-post flowery. that's interesting again. Blimey, i've got some questions to ask tomorrow.

[flowerybeanbag]

Are you sure? If they continued to pay you and your work continued seamlessly the delay in the appearance of a written piece of paper confirming the extension of your contract really doesn't matter...

[eeewahwoowah]

Hello again, thank you KatyMac and Flowerybeanbag for responding to my post last night. I just wanted to update you on what happened at the termination meeting today which has just ended.

The meeting began with a brief talk about why our project was being terminated. We had about 5 minutes discussion around this issue at the of which the guy chairing the meeting said that if there was nothing else to discuss he proposed ending the meeting there! He wasn't even going to mention redundancy so I had to ask him if this was indeed a redundancy scenario. He said:

"No. Your fixed term contract has come to an end and that's it no redundancy. If you look into issues around redundancy and talk to people about it you will find that it is not a very clear cut situation. There are laws which state that redundancy is not always applicable. In this case it is not applicable"

He was not able to explain what these laws were and why it was not applicable which suggested to me that he really doesn't have a clue so I made a formal request for clarification.

I am baffled. I really cannot think why redundancy would not apply. I await his formal clarification with bated breath.

[flowerybeanbag]

I also await with bated breath details of these laws stating that redundancy is not always applicable....

To my mind a fixed contract ending because funding for that project has come to an end is one of the clearest cases of redundancy there is - no controversial selection criteria or anything. There's no more money therefore the post must end. Probably the only thing that would be a more obvious case of redundancy would be if an entire office or whatever was closing down.

It did a few years ago used to be the case that fixed term contracts were not treated the same, but it's been quite a while since that changed.

[eeewahwoowah]

Hi flowerybeanbag. Is that the 2002 regulations about fair treatment for fixed term contract workers? I have been reading up

I will report back when i know just what the flip they are on about. Should be good for a larf!

thanks for your input - it has been very helpful.

[flowerybeanbag]

You don't need me at all!

That's the one, yep.

Here for anyone reading who hasn't read up themselves!

[eeewahwoowah]

Good news!!!!!!

My boss appears to have now read his copy of Employment Law for Dummies a little more closely and come to the conclusion that we are entitled to statutory redundancy pay and we will be getting it [air punch]

All's well that ends well and respect to you Flowery for your support

[flowerybeanbag]

Hoorah!