Redundancy query

Kkerr

Hi.
Someone I know recently received a letter from their employer stating that she has to train a colleague from eastern Europe in her day to day job. The letter says that when the training is complete management will review and decide whether to restructure.

So essentially they (there's 3 of them) are training their replacements before they are made redundant and the work is moved to eastern Europe.

But they haven't been officially told they will be made redundant, presumably to ensure they come in and train the people, rather than go sick or refuse to train them if they knew 100% that they would be made redundant. However people have now uncovered that the company has hired new personnel in the same Dept in that eastern European country.

The whole thing seems pretty nasty work by management; making up a fake review process pretending there's some hope to keep their jobs.
Is there anything illegal or questionable about what they are doing?

Thanks

_Brian

No, at the moment they have jobs and haven’t been told otherwise.

OMM 0000

Bad situation. It does sound like they're going to be replaced by cheaper workers in another country.

This would entitle them to redundancy though, as they are being let go because their roles don't exist anymore.

judeboy101

Is it in their job description to train new personale? If so do it in the most time consuming kack handed way assuming they are been managed out. Turkeys voting for Xmas springs to mind.

Grab All Association

Please name and shame the company so I can boycott them and any other subsidiaries. It’s like giving someone a shovel and making them dig their own grave.

Kkerr

Thanks,
It ain't in their job description to train people but they're not unionised so there's not much they can do. If they refuse to train them they will just seal their fate.
It's only statutory redundancy even though they are a big rich company.
No naming and shaming (yet).
Any more thoughts please let me know.

Seth Brundle

judeboy101 wrote: »

Is it in their job description to train new personale? If so do it in the most time consuming kack handed way assuming they are been managed out. Turkeys voting for Xmas springs to mind.

.. and give a valid justification for making them redundant with no sympathy from colleagues?

Grab All Association wrote: »

Please name and shame the company so I can boycott them and any other subsidiaries. It’s like giving someone a shovel and making them dig their own grave.

:rolleyes:

_Brian

Kkerr wrote: »

Thanks,
It ain't in their job description to train people but they're not unionised so there's not much they can do. If they refuse to train them they will just seal their fate.
It's only statutory redundancy even though they are a big rich company.
No naming and shaming (yet).
Any more thoughts please let me know.

They could approach management directly about this and their future security

But if the company want to offshore their jobs there’s not much can be done.

Someone mentioned making a mess of the training, that’s grand advice, but they need a reference going forward and it’s not a great way to get it.

OMM 0000

I don't agree with making a mess of the training. The Eastern European staff have done nothing wrong.

I think you could all try to negotiate a better redundancy package.

OldMrBrennan83

OMM 0000 wrote: »

I don't agree with making a mess of the training. The Eastern European staff have done nothing wrong.

I think you could all try to negotiate a better redundancy package.

Hurts the company though, which is job 1.

And frankly, **** the new staff and training replacements at all.

Kkerr

There's a 0% chance of them negotiating a better deal.
We'll see how it ends.
Might post an update if more questions arise.
Thanks all

amcalester

Kkerr wrote: »

There's a 0% chance of them negotiating a better deal.
We'll see how it ends.
Might post an update if more questions arise.
Thanks all

0% chance if they’ve already trained the replacements.

I’d say a good chance if they negotiated a contingency redundancy package prior to undertaking the training.

It might even make shifting the roles to EE less financially attractive.

Kkerr

amcalester wrote: »

0% chance if they’ve already trained the replacements.

I’d say a good chance if they negotiated a contingency redundancy package prior to undertaking the training.

It might even make shifting the roles to EE less financially attractive.

Fair point! I will suggest that.