Showing posts with label redundency. Show all posts
Showing posts with label redundency. Show all posts

Thursday, January 05, 2012

Employment Law Prospects 2012: Workers are going to be stuffed

This is from the newsletter published yesterday by Employment Law Barrister Daniel Barnett:-

"Expected Developments in Employment law" 2012 (my comments in italics)

"31 January
closure date for calls for evidence on the effectiveness of TUPE and the scope of the collective redundancy rules - may result in a formal consultation later in the year (TUPE protection will be brought down to the absolute minimum and you could be made redundant in just 30 days)

1 February
new tribunal award limits come into force (Good but still inadequate)

6 March
consultation closes on fees in tribunals and the EAT (It could cost you around £1750 to go to an employment tribunal - far more if you want to appeal)

April
expected that qualifying period for unfair dismissal will increase to 2 years · various tribunal reforms to take effect, e.g. increase in deposit orders and costs awards (bad)· unpaid parental leave to increase to 4 months · working time rules to be amended to allow holiday to be carried forward in limited circumstances · maternity/paternity/adoption pay increases · SSP increases (you could be sacked for no good reason after 1 year 11 months and you will have no effective legal remedy)

October
pensions auto-enrolment begins for larger employers (Good) · national minimum wage may increase, depending on what the Low Pay Commission recommends in February (wait and see)

Developments with no confirmed date but likely to be progressed in 2012
penalties for employers who breach of employment rights (Good but expect wrist slap)· early compulsory ACAS conciliation of all tribunal claims (possibly good) · amendment of whistleblowing rules so that disclosures about breaches of employment contracts are no longer covered (Bad) · compromise agreements to be simplified (possibly good) · consultation on 'protected conversations' between employers and staff about employment issues without risk of dispute (your employer could bully you out of your job legally without protection)· consultation on rapid resolution scheme as alternative to tribunal for low-value and straightforward disputes (Fixed penalty ticket justice?)

· Acas Disciplinary and Grievance Code to be 'looked at' with a view to a simpler dismissal process (nuf said?)

Do not expect the "law" to protect you at work. Time to join a union for collective protection and the Labour Party to get rid of this Government in 2015.

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Tower Hamlets Homes Lobby

This evening I went along to a noisy but largely cheerful lobby by UNISON members of a Tower Hamlets Homes Board meeting in the Toby Club in Bethnal Green.  Tower Hamlets Homes is a ALMO which has run into let us say "problems".

I use to be an assistant branch secretary of the  UNISON Tower Hamlets Local Government Branch and was invited by local stewards to attend this lobby.

Management have announced 80 redundancies (out of some 500 staff).  Which is bad enough - but what has incensed the workforce is that they have been told that they have to apply within 7 days for voluntary redundancy or they will lose any right to a severance payment.  Despite the fact this severance payment is a TUPE right!

What is even more iniquitous is that the staff have not been told what possible jobs are available under the new proposed structure.  Never mind what are the proposed job descriptions, numbers of posts, possible grades and assimilation rights.  These are agreed good practice HR processes which are being simply ignored.

What this means is that staff are being blackmailed into applying for redundancy before knowing all the facts and when it might have turned out that they have a job to go to after all.  This is bad employment practice and probably needs to be tested at an employment tribunal. 

Wearing another "hat" I am extremely concerned at some other allegations made about staff aged 55 or over which I will investigate further.

Staff told me that they understood that the organisation has severe financial difficulties and they have their own ideas about reducing costs but the current process is simply wrong and grossly unfair.

The UNISON reps did have a number of positive and constructive conversations with managers and members of the Board on the way in which I thought were really helpful. The reps had produced an excellent precise and hard hitting leaflet detailing their concerns. 

All in all a successful text book lobby and many thanks to Tony and Trevor for organising it.  They tell me this is only the beginning.

Saturday, October 09, 2010

Letter to David Cameron

"In proposing a reply to one’s opponents, in the best Oxbridge tradition, it is traditional to start by finding at least one flattering thing to say of them. This letter is in more of a Roman tradition. I come not to praise Caesar but to bury him.

Was the tone struck at the start supposed to be Churchillian?

“We can build a country defined not by what we can consume but by what we can contribute. A country, a society where we can say I am not alone. I will play my part. I will work with others to give Britain a brand new start.”

Winston was rallying the country to stand up to the Nazi hordes when he asked us to fight them on the beaches, a somewhat more noble enterprise than your government is attempting. You are asking us to bow down to the greed of the financial sector and the bankers who have cost this country dearly, to self-flagellate while you pull the great achievements of Britain down about us. You are defending the indefensible, declaring war on the working people of this country.

Of course the reference may have been intended to be more to JFK, asking not what the country can do for you but what you can do for your country. But you sir are no John Kennedy, more the boy who cries wolf trying to scare us into believing the unbelievable.

Like your Chancellor before you, you are content to lie to the British people, spouting the same old right wing ideology dressed up as urgency and necessity and accepting the praise of the IMF, a discredited body who failed to see the financial storm coming even as the tornado blew in. Your economic policy turns the clock back to the disreputable Tory policies of the 1920’s. Another Great Depression anyone?

But then, when my family were standing in dole queues then, yours and Osborne’s were probably dining at the Ritz. Then, as now, as the song goes, it’s the rich what get the pleasure and the poor the bloody blame.
“Reduced spending,” you say will be difficult, “but lets remember a lot of businesses have had to make savings in recent years”.

But can you answer an honest question? How many businesses have remained solvent while cutting wages, cutting investment and selling off the plant and machinery? But that is what you propose to do to the British economy, isn’t it?

You cannot be serious in asking us to trust your government with the NHS when the White Paper that your party has just produced will dismantle its infrastructure and sell off the component parts to the highest bidder, producing a health care system akin to an American model where treatment depends not on your illness but on the ability to pay, thus ensuring the highest profit for privatised providers?

Please don’t ask me and the rest of the working people of this country to believe you when you talk about poverty. For the Tory Party, poverty is another country, one you have never visited and have no intention of travelling to. I doubt that Mrs C counts out the leckie money, the rent and the council tax from her meagre minimum wage, to see if she has enough left to feed the kids that week. Spare us the crocodile tears.

“Fairness isn’t just about getting help from the state”? Your quote. You said it. What about the help given to the tax dodgers and non doms who fail to pay their way? Why is the state helping them dodge paying their fair share?

You talk of “more freedom for local councils to keep more of the money when they attract business to the area”. At the same time you deprive local government of funds necessary to keep services running. We remember the great cities of this country in the 1980 are when you tried the same tactics. When Glasgow, Newcastle, Liverpool and Manchester were starved of necessary investment and they became urban wastelands from which businesses fled. We don’t look forward to time turning back.

We know what you mean when you say, "No more top down, bureaucrat driven public services”. Strip out the adjectives and there is the truth: - No more public services. Strip out the professionals, as you said of the police service and leave law and order to the special constables, the Keystone cops, or the hobby Bobbies. And since we don’t have enough university places or apprenticeships for our young people, let’s ship them to the colonies, sorry offer them “international service". Thunderbirds are go!

I’m afraid your roots as a PR man are showing. Your performance as an international statesman is as convincing as Roger Moore’s in 007. There is no integrity, only bluster and sounds bites hiding the use of political power as a means of ensuring that post war social democracy is dismantled, and that we return a life that is solitary, poor, nasty brutal and short.

So I won’t be heeding you plea “to pull together”. In my world suicide is to be avoided, as bad for the health".

Jane Carolan - hat tip UNISONactive

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Email your MP about “fair play on redundancies” - Unions together

Time is running out. Email your MP now to support this campaign. Check out this excellent short video of from grass roots Labour supporting trade unionists. They explain why they think it is so important that redundancy rates needs to be significantly increased. I posted on this last month about how we also need to stop any race to the bottom by good employers who pay above the rate.

Below is an urgent message from Tony Woodley

This Friday, Members of Parliament will have the chance to vote to make redundancy pay fairer, as Lindsay Hoyle MP's Bill is due to receive its second reading in the Commons.

Labour's trade unions have worked together on this campaign, to get a better deal for workers - a better deal that is more important than ever in these tough economic times.

Unions work hard to look after their members' jobs - but when redundancies do happen, unions also want to make sure that those affected get a fair deal. But for most workers, if they are made redundant, the payment they would get for each year of service is not based on how much they earn a week - it is capped at £350 - about half of average earnings.

This is an issue that matters to millions of ordinary working people up and down the country - thousands of people have got in touch with their MPs to ask them to support the Bill. Earlier this week, we asked our supporters to get in touch with us to let us know why fair redundancy pay matters to them.

Being made redundant has a huge impact on individuals, families and communities. It's only fair that we make sure people get the fairest deal possible.

We have had great support for this campaign from Labour Members of Parliament, and we urge them to turn out this Friday to vote the Bill through. And we also hope the government listens - to their own MPs, to the trade unions, and to all the ordinary people who deserve a better deal - and acts to right this wrong.

Tony Woodley
Chair, TULO - Labour's unions togetherJoint General Secretary, Unite the Union

PS. Email your MP now if you haven't yet done so.

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Fair Deal on Redundancy

I’ve just emailed my MP to ask her to support the “Unions Together” campaign in support of the proposed bill to increase statutory redundancy pay.

Check out the link here to email your MP. You only need your post code and it took me 2 minutes. Forward the link to as many people as you can.

Many employers do pay above the statutory minimum but unless we get this increased then good employers run the risk of being under pressure to pay less. It would be a race to the bottom that we do not want to take part.

This is the request from Helen at Unions Together

"On Friday March 13th, Lindsay Hoyle MP will be putting forward a Private Member’s Bill in the House of Commons that would uprate the current level of statutory redundancy pay – the minimum that workers can expect to be paid if they are laid off. When it was first introduced, this was more than double the average weekly wage. But because it has not been increased with inflation, it is now worth only half of average pay. This is an important issue for working people, particularly in these turbulent economic times.

Because of the rules on Private Member’s Bills, we need enough MPs to turn up to support the Bill, or any MP who opposes it can just “talk out” the Bill, preventing it even getting to a vote. It is crucial that we ensure there are enough Labour MPs supporting the Bill in the House of Commons on March 13th so it can move forward. That’s where you can help – by writing to your MP and asking them to be in the House of Commons for the debate".

Join "Unions Together" facebook here

UPDATE: I got an email response from my MP Lyn Brown this morning and we will have a "talk" about this issue.

Monday, February 02, 2009

Don’t mention the Unions

While waiting at home for British Gas to turn up, I’ve tried to catch up on some reading. I came across this article in this weeks’ “Inside Housing” and have fired off this email to the Editor.

Dear Editor

I am somewhat amazed that in the otherwise informative article “Prepare for the Worse” (
Inside Housing 30 January 2009 - threat of redundancies), there was no mention of trade unions? Expecting employees to suddenly become employment rights experts, to challenge selection procedures and to carry out their own appeals is not realistic.

Solicitors are usually not allowed to represent people during any internal proceedings so waiting until after you have been sacked to ask for advice is not the best approach. Union members also do not have to pay solicitors for employment law advice.

I think that in the best of times you should join a trade union but in this really difficult period the best approach to safeguarding your job is a trade union application form.


People spend a fortune insuring their cars but don’t spend a few quid per week insuring their livelihoods.

Monday, January 05, 2009

“Oversacking” Redundancy a false economy say CIPD

Shock horror! I am in agreement with the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development! (CIPD - the HR professional body). I heard their Chief Economist, John Philpot, being interviewed on PM while driving home. The terminology, like nearly all modern day HR jargon is awful but John warned companies against what he called “Oversacking” of staff during the present crisis.

Not only is redundancy expensive (average of at least £16,300 per worker) but research has shown that in past recessions companies have panicked and unnecessarily made staff redundant then had to incur pointless costs to reemploy when the upturn comes along. Research has also found that redundancies increase staff turnover and reduce the productivity of the staff who are left.

It is urging employers to plan for recovery by retaining their people, rather than downsizing and risking long-term damage to their business... Employers should hold their nerve and focus on retaining talent and investing in the skills of their people. It is these people with their commitment, productivity and ability to add value who will ultimately keep individual businesses and the whole of the UK competitive, and put us in a strong position to recover from the downturn quickly.”

I hope that those Housing associations which are laying off skilled development workers take note!

Check out the press release here (which does not include the “Oversacking” term for some strange reason).