I dont agree. Its illegal to make someone redundant and immediately replace them. If someone loses their job for reason of redundancy, its because the job will no longer exist.
I agree
sadly a quick change of job title/name and slight change to job description/working hours etc , circumvents such measures . 
Indeed, yes. Employment law that I once had to professionally adhere to and enforce is very complex. The power the employer has over the employee, or the reverse, is all dependant on the contract of employment that is enjoyed by the employee, and the legal boundaries specified. It is all in the wording of that in accordance with the Employment Rights Act 1996, which keeps solicitors specialising in this area busy in a lucrative manner.
I had to ensure the issuing of the employees contacts specified the minimum of hours that the employee was going to work. Any changes to that had to be agreed by both parties. Now in 2022 zero hours contracts are perfectly legal, but in my opinion are immoral, so the employee has no rights to demand a minimum working week.
As for redundancy, there are all manner of ways that can be enacted but subject to the length of service of the employee, and the wording of their Job Description which should define what duties they are expected to perform. The employer can legally decide that those duties coupled with the Job Description is now not beneficial to the business, not required, and therefore can make THAT position Redundant. The employer cannot legally employee someone else to fill that previously made redundant position, but they CAN create a new role for the new, or even existing, employee, with a changed specified list of functions under a new Job Description. Of course the company MUST pay, at least, the National legal minimum of redundancy, dependant on length of service, coupled with all outstanding holiday pay, although I would hope the Unions will negotiate a satisfactory level of redundancy pay commensurate with the employees employment situation.
P&O Ferries are doing just that, as my old company did, to save money and, it is always claimed, to improve the business model, thus potentially saving the business from failure and protecting other employees jobs. P&O I note are creating “lesser roles and duties” to replace those 800 currently employed who are being made redundant. Those employees have every right to then apply to be considered for the new roles, but P&O have every right to not re-employ them.
Regardless of the legal circumstances, P&O have handled the whole matter very badly, and have created for themselves a PR disaster. This will no doubt badly effect the business, and negate whatever they were trying to achieve, which the Directors should be ashamed of and whoever of them made the decision for this action to transpire should be themselves be dissmissed.
Author
Topic: P and O (Read 1848 times)