We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
09 Sep 14
21:23
Joined:
Date Joined:
20 Aug 02
My role was made redundant last month. They were at pains to explain that it was the role being made redundant, not me.
Today I have seen an advert for my job, including a mention of one aspect that they kept highlighting throughout the redundancy process was being stripped away to be handled by another company instead.
Can they do this? Surely it's illegal to make a role redundant, give all the justifications for doing so, then just advertise for it again two weeks later?
Today I have seen an advert for my job, including a mention of one aspect that they kept highlighting throughout the redundancy process was being stripped away to be handled by another company instead.
Can they do this? Surely it's illegal to make a role redundant, give all the justifications for doing so, then just advertise for it again two weeks later?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 16
|
By:
It seems to me that the larger companies can pretty well do what they like. They would argue that a re-organisation had taken place after redundancies had been made and that this new role was different. Were you on a final salary pension?
|
|
By:
Is only a small company though - 14/15 people. Only one position made redundant. 6 page document with 30 points on it justifying the decision and explaining why the role wasn't needed.
Was paying into a company pension. |
|
By:
the problem you've got is that unless you recorded your conversations with them, it's your word against theirs - and having worked in hr I know what slimy ****s they are, you can bet they will have covered their arse in legal terms... good luck rtb
 |
|
By:
They select the person(s) they want to leave, then engineer the process to fit it. It is rarely about your skills or contribution, it's whether your face fits. You could seek free advice from an employment lawyer. You'd get a 10-15 minute chat and a bit of advice based upon the facts you present to them. I spoke to one some years ago and once I told him I'd received a decent pay off, he did not think there was much chance of a result.
|
|
By:
Did you appeal against it? You can normally do this & take someone in with you.
|
|
By:
Seems like a simple but effective well engineered manoeuvre to get someone to do your job on a lower wage.
|
|
By:
Didn't appeal against it but had someone in with me note taking, and have copies of all their official notes from the meetings. Both sets of notes state that one substantial section of the job was being removed to another company and wasn't needed, and that an executive position was not required in the department due to the experience of my line manager being sufficient. So it was all cut and dried. Now though apparently there is a need for an executive and the part of the job that was being removed all of a sudden is in the job description for the advertised role.
|
|
By:
Scandanavian Haven - exactly what it seems to be to me. But surely it isn't legal? Otherwise there would be no point in employment law and regulations, you could just make anyone redundant by saying the role was going, then start it up again the following week.
|
|
By:
If memory serves, if they make you redundant they can't advertise your job for 26 weeks from the day you leave their employment.
Check it out with an employment lawyer. |
|
By:
Cheers, will do.
|
|
By:
re apply for the job.
you have the experience and know the role inside out. They wouldn't even need to train you up.  |
|
By:
Having engineered this for whatever reason they had I don't think I'd make the shortlist....
|
|
By:
I wouldn't be surprised in the least if this was common practice by companies.
Don't know the legalities, but I guess the new employee's contract can be compared to your old one, assuming both could be presented in claims court when he/she's hired, if that 26 week rule is true then they are banged to rights unless they've been cute and worded the roles/responsibilities differently. |
|
By:
This is how it is when a country has a surplus of labour. There will be hundreds of
applicants for the "new" post. |
|
By:
Butlers, two a penny imo
|
|
By:
Roger ,see a specialist,i studied employment law in the dim and distant past and as cmat suggests there was a 26wks rule and also there were rules for what happens if the employer backtracks on changes to the nature of the job.Dont know what the current rules are but imo definitely worth seeking professional advice ,if only to maximise the payout.
|