Injury at work...12 weeks recovery...today made redundant

[mandyjayne]

Hi all..

 

My son (22) has worked as a stonemason at the same company for 6 years. Unblemished work record.

In sept this year he had an accident whilst cutting marble...severed his right index finger his dominant hand, went 70% through his tendon, had to go to East Grinstead Hospital for a micro hand surgeon to repair.

 

He is 9 weeks into a 12 week recovery period, consultant flatly refused to allow return to work before this date.

 

He was asked to go in for a meeting today, and was made redundant. He was the only one.

 

No redundancy pay was offered, but told he had a letter in the post regarding that. He was asked to leave through a side door to avoid his work frineds.

 

We have an appointment with a solicitor thursday next week for a claim for the injury (we only made this today...as he was worried he would lose his job if he claimed)

 

But we need to establish if they can make him redundant whilst sick???

 

Many thanks

 

MJ:mad2:

[postggj]

shocking

 

what reason was given for the redundency by the employer

 

any notice period given??

 

they cant make you redundant while sick

[SarEl]

They most certainly can make someone redundant whilst sick - sickness has absolutely nothing to do with whether a post is redundant or not. However, based on the details (which are a bit sparse, to be fair) this is an unfair dismissal and not a redundancy at all. Which, if you can prove a case, then it would be worth somewhat more than six years redundancy pay! Unfortunately, it sounds like another trip to a lawyer is in order - the one dealing with your personal injury claim is unlikley to do employment law too, although s/he may be able to point you in the right direction. I suspect the company may struggle to show that a fair redundancy selection process took place, and they may have ommitted to also mention his right to representation at the meeting (which would be very naughty and quite unlawful) - if you are lucky they will also foget to tell him of his right to appeal. There was certainly no consultation period - another big whoopsee on their part. Although for a single redundancy theydo not have to consult for long, simply calling someone in and making them redundant and escorting them from the premises certainly doesn't cut it! Hmm - I might even be inclined to throw in a disability discrimination claim too - it's a bit of a stretch right now, but it isn't beyond the bounds of possibility for a wily lawyer!!! Make sure you get a wily one!

[postggj]

totally agree

 

its not being dismissed thats the problem, its the lack of proper procedure in the way he was dismissed thats unlawful

 

need more info though on what reason he was dismissed

[SarEl]

totally agree

 

its not being dismissed thats the problem, its the lack of proper procedure in the way he was dismissed thats unlawful

 

need more info though on what reason he was dismissed

 

I think you have misunderstood what I was saying. I conclude that there is both a problem that he was potentially unfairly dismissed and that proper procedure may not have been followed (which would make any dismissal automatically unfair). I find it hardly credible that there was a redundancy situation at all given the circumstances, and I think a tribunal would also find it rather incredible.

[mandyjayne]

thank you both for all that info...i will repost tomorrow what actually was said to him...and maybe we can get some more sound advice.

 

I will not let this go i think we have some case, be it big or small

 

MJ

[mandyjayne]

They most certainly can make someone redundant whilst sick - sickness has absolutely nothing to do with whether a post is redundant or not. However, based on the details (which are a bit sparse, to be fair) this is an unfair dismissal and not a redundancy at all. Which, if you can prove a case, then it would be worth somewhat more than six years redundancy pay! Unfortunately, it sounds like another trip to a lawyer is in order - the one dealing with your personal injury claim is unlikley to do employment law too, although s/he may be able to point you in the right direction. I suspect the company may struggle to show that a fair redundancy selection process took place, and they may have ommitted to also mention his right to representation at the meeting (which would be very naughty and quite unlawful) - if you are lucky they will also foget to tell him of his right to appeal. There was certainly no consultation period - another big whoopsee on their part. Although for a single redundancy theydo not have to consult for long, simply calling someone in and making them redundant and escorting them from the premises certainly doesn't cut it! Hmm - I might even be inclined to throw in a disability discrimination claim too - it's a bit of a stretch right now, but it isn't beyond the bounds of possibility for a wily lawyer!!! Make sure you get a wily one!

 

Hi all..

 

Ok in answer to some of the questions:

 

SarEl - they did not inform him of his right to representation (he was alone) and did not inform him of his right to appeal.

 

post - He receieved a letter via a work collegue a week before saying someone would be made redundant.

 

The reasons given for his redundancy were: too young to drive the work van, he is 22 and has had a full clean driving licence for 3 years. (their policy is anyone over 25) so did not want to pay the extra to insure him)

 

Going to cost them money to send him on a Health and Safety course. (which he has to do to return to work due to the injury)

 

Unable to fix stone ie out on site with the fixers and fitters. In the 6 years he was there his job was in the yard with 2 other guys, he was mainly a cutter but did fabrication, and lots of finishing work. Very rarely went on site as the company employ fixers and fitters!

 

That was it...letter in post regarding your redundancy pay...goodbye!

[mariefab]

The reasons given for his redundancy were: too young to drive the work van, he is 22 and has had a full clean driving licence for 3 years. (their policy is anyone over 25) so did not want to pay the extra to insure him)

 

Going to cost them money to send him on a Health and Safety course. (which he has to do to return to work due to the injury)

 

Unable to fix stone ie out on site with the fixers and fitters. In the 6 years he was there his job was in the yard with 2 other guys, he was mainly a cutter but did fabrication, and lots of finishing work. Very rarely went on site as the company employ fixers and fitters!

I suppose that it's too much to hope for that they were so foolish as to put all of this in writing?

 

So, I suggest that your son write to his employer, by recorded delivery, asking for a written statement of the reasons for his dismissal (in order to hopefully give them an opportunity to drop themselves in it by repeating in print some of the reasons above).

[SarEl]

The reasons given for his redundancy were: too young to drive the work van, he is 22 and has had a full clean driving licence for 3 years. (their policy is anyone over 25) so did not want to pay the extra to insure him)

 

Going to cost them money to send him on a Health and Safety course. (which he has to do to return to work due to the injury)

 

Unable to fix stone ie out on site with the fixers and fitters. In the 6 years he was there his job was in the yard with 2 other guys, he was mainly a cutter but did fabrication, and lots of finishing work. Very rarely went on site as the company employ fixers and fitters!

I suppose that it's too much to hope for that they were so foolish as to put all of this in writing?

 

So, I suggest that your son write to his employer, by recorded delivery, asking for a written statement of the reasons for his dismissal (in order to hopefully give them an opportunity to drop themselves in it by repeating in print some of the reasons above).

 

One can only hope! So far they have clocked up: failure to consult; no fair and objective slection criteria; not advising of the right to representation; and just added age discrimination (if this was an issue they should not have employed him!); quite possibly detriment as a result of industrial injury - and of course there still may be a disability discromination claim in here too. Some employers should not be let out on their own!

[mandyjayne]

Thanks SarEl....you, for clear reasons to me, know your stuff!

 

We are seeing a Personal Injury Lawyer on thursday, he has a collegue who deals with Employment law so will have a consult with him also, im going to take them to the cleaners!

 

Will keep you all updated.

 

thanks MJ:-)

[mandyjayne]

well they were stupid enough to put it all in writing, got the letter yesterday.

 

Still no cheque attached!! the accountant will contact him in the week they said!

 

Just found out he has overdraft protection so will look into getting that paid off for him too, as he has gone down to £88 a week from a substantial weekly wage.

 

MJ:-)

[Surfer01]

Hope he gets paid a substantila maount in compensation in addition to redundancy pay plus holiday pay.

[SarEl]

well they were stupid enough to put it all in writing, got the letter yesterday.

 

Still no cheque attached!! the accountant will contact him in the week they said!

 

Just found out he has overdraft protection so will look into getting that paid off for him too, as he has gone down to £88 a week from a substantial weekly wage.

 

MJ:-)

 

Oh goodie. Combining the fact that he happens to be off sick and is taking legal advice about his injury at work, I can't see how any tribunal wouldn't see the connection!

[mariefab]

I've come across a few (usually smaller) employers who believe that 'made redundant' is just a nicer way of saying 'sacked', and are therefore geniunely unaware that there is a redundancy process that should be followed.

 

i.e.

Employee does something wrong = sacked.

Employee does nothing wrong but we want rid, for whatever reason, = made redundant.

 

I wonder if that is the case here.

If so, no doubt the Tribunal will (expensively) educate them.

Edited November 29, 2010 by mariefab
typo

[postggj]

yep

 

a 30% uplift on any award is common

[SarEl]

yep

 

a 30% uplift on any award is common

 

It would be REALLY unusual actually - the maximum uplift is now 25% !!!