Redundancy TieBreak

[coolestone]

I have been working for my company for 10 months and they have announced redundancies today. Out of 10 Project Managers of the same role, 4 (of which I am 1) have been told we are in a Tie Break situation where we can either select Voluntary Redundancy (if we do, the company still have the right to decline) but if no-one does then we go to external Interviews for scoring.

 

My issue is that they have based their decision on choosing the 4 people on performance reviews from 2009-2011. I only joined in June 2011 and was given a 6 month review that was all fine, no issues noted at all. I have performance documents confirming I am doing what is expected of me. Only 1 of the remaining six staff could be seen to be a 'star' performer, so I do not understand how or why I have been selected and not the rest of the team.

 

The question I have really is can they compare 6 months of a new starters performance to 3 years of previous employees and if the ratings of those individuals where the same as mine, have I been unfairly selected on the basis of being the newest employee of the bunch (the rest have been with the team for 5-15 years).

 

Thanks

[Sidewinder]

Sorry to hear of your situation.

 

Are you sure that this was the ONLY criteria used? Could it perhaps be that the decisions were deadlocked based on the skills and performance review criteria and length of service has then been used as a filter to whittle the list down further? Unfortunately (to answer your question), length of service is a valid scoring method, and with only 10 months service you would (I'm afraid to say) be cheaper to get rid of than others for whom a redundancy payment would be mandatory. That, harsh as it may seem would be perfectly lawful.

[becky2585]

Your main problem here is length of service - with only 10 months, they didn't actually have to take you through a consultation process and could have dismissed you with notice without any sort of procedure, as you can't bring an unfair dismissal claim.

 

If you are offered an enhanced voluntary redundancy package, it would be wise to consider accepting it, as if they go on to compulsory redundancies and you're dismissed, you wouldn't even be entitled to a redundancy payment and you'd be leaving with only your notice period.

[coolestone]

So it turns out someone else took VR anyway.

 

However i have also been informed that, the criteria was actually based around performance not length of service! In my time here I have not been given any reason to believe my performance was below par. So I am starting to believe I was unfairly selected on the basis that I suffered mental health issues which required me to attend Counselling, however I did not take leave of absence (although I could have, but struggled on).

 

I wonder if I have justification for constructive dismissal as I am starting to think I have been targeted unfairly?