TYPE transfer :/

Bean club

Hi there.

Was wondering if anyone could offer any advice or share some insight if they have been through a similar situation.

Basically my job is being outsourced to a new company and the staff are being TUPE'd to this new company. Currently my work is based in Dublin 2 and my commute is a 15/20min walk. The company I'm being outsourced to are moving us to their offices in Maynooth. I don't drive and with public transport my commute to the new office will now be 1hr 45mins each way!

There will be some redundancies as part of the transfer and at the start of the consultation period I got a letter from the new company saying they don't think my role will be required. Now today ( 5 weeks later) I get an email from them saying they are going to issue me with a new letter and my role is now required.

I'm pretty fed up with the situation and feel that I'm being completely messed around. An additional 3 hours is being added to my day in commuting for a job in a location I would never voluntarily apply for.

Can a company make such changes to your work or do I have any say in this? The impression I get is that there is a job there for me and if I don't like it then I can resign.

Sorry for the long post, would love to hear other people's experiences of this.

Thanks a mill

Stheno

Change of llocation issues are a very grey area
They are doing what they need to under tupe

I know of staff tuped from leixlip to blanchardstown who had the choices you had

Get some legal advice

livedadream

Bean club wrote: »

Currently my work is based in Dublin 2 and my commute is a 15/20min walk. The company I'm being outsourced to are moving us to their offices in Maynooth. I don't drive and with public transport my commute to the new office will now be 1hr 45mins each way!

it depends:

TUPE regulations state: employees must be transferred with their accrued years of service, their existing terms and conditions of employment (with a limited exception in relation to pensions)

The EAT has been pretty clear in regards to relocation on this in the UK (which is where Ireland takes most of its case law from as it hasnt happened here much)
Abellio London Ltd (Formerly Travel London Ltd) v Musse and others found that a two hour increase in employees commute was too much, however, this doesn't mean that your three hours will be deemed too far by an Irish WRC.

I would suggest speaking to your new HR team and asking them what options are available for you.

Nody

livedadream wrote: »

it depends:

TUPE regulations state: employees must be transferred with their accrued years of service, their existing terms and conditions of employment (with a limited exception in relation to pensions)

The EAT has been pretty clear in regards to relocation on this in the UK (which is where Ireland takes most of its case law from as it hasnt happened here much)
Abellio London Ltd (Formerly Travel London Ltd) v Musse and others found that a two hour increase in employees commute was too much, however, this doesn't mean that your three hours will be deemed too far by an Irish WRC.

I would suggest speaking to your new HR team and asking them what options are available for you.

Normally the question would be distance and not increase in time (OP claimed public transport but what if they used a car for example); using the PS as a base line 50 km distance would be seen as reasonable basically. In this case it's ~30km difference in location so I doubt OP would have much of a leg to stand on.

livedadream

Nody wrote: »

Normally the question would be distance and not increase in time (OP claimed public transport but what if they used a car for example); using the PS as a base line 50 km distance would be seen as reasonable basically. In this case it's ~30km difference in location so I doubt OP would have much of a leg to stand on.

i think time v distance would be up to the WRC to decide.

you cant single out people for using a car v public transport, then people with cars would simply argue that people on buses etc would be getting preferential treatment.

ie if the organisation moved to somewhere that there was no access by public transport.
how she gets to work doesnt come into it, it is her choice to take public transport.

Bean club

Hi Guys,

Thanks for your responses.

I had actually heard of the case of Abellio London Ltd (Formerly Travel London Ltd) v Musse although as you say as it's in the UK I'm not sure whether the Irish WRC would be of the same view.

I don't have a drivers licence and to be honest can't afford a car at the moment so public transport is my only option currently.

It's 30km give or take to the new location. The frustrating thing is that they have offices in Grand Canal Dock but have decided that all staff that TUPE over will move to their Maynooth offices instead. It's my opinion that they are choosing this location as they know it's not practical for a lot of staff and they are probably hoping to avoid paying out redundancies if staff that can't/won't commute choose to leave.

I know TUPE regulation is in place to protect the employees jobs and rights but I feel like it is being abused in this case. I thought terms and conditions had to transfer like for like but this feels like a substantial change to my working conditions which is to my detriment.

We are being offered no monetary incentives to relocate despite the fact that this move will add additional hours and additional expense of transport. (I know I am lucky in that I don't have to currently pay travel expenses or commute but I moved over this side of the city intentionally to be closer to work... It's not feasible to do the same again)

livedadream

know it's not practical for a lot of staff and they are probably hoping to avoid paying out redundancies if staff that can't/won't commute choose to leave.

bear in mind that if this happens they wont have the employees necessary to full fill the contract. its in the companies favour to keep the staff that know their roles and know whats expected. thats the whole point of TUPE'ing over contracts. you can only pay out redundancy if the role doesnt exist anymore.

I know TUPE regulation is in place to protect the employees jobs and rights but I feel like it is being abused in this case. I thought terms and conditions had to transfer like for like but this feels like a substantial change to my working conditions which is to my detriment.

it doesnt have to be like for like, like i said: ''employees must be transferred with their accrued years of service, their existing terms and conditions of employment'' if your location in your contract says 'number 1 office street dublin' then that is your workplace however most companies are more savvy and have a clause stating you will report to 'where needs must'.

the fact is yes your conditions have changed but it would be up to the WRC to decide if they have changed substantially or not and if it is for a group, it would be rare for one employee to take a case like you are implying.

We are being offered no monetary incentives to relocate despite the fact that this move will add additional hours and additional expense of transport. (I know I am lucky in that I don't have to currently pay travel expenses or commute but I moved over this side of the city intentionally to be closer to work... It's not feasible to do the same again)

i understand what you are saying however if you look at your whole staff community it might actually suit some people better.

The best thing to do is to ask for advice, do you have a union?

Bean club

Thanks. I'll have to check what my contract says but I'm sure they would probably have included a clause like you said to allow for other locations.

There is a union here but I'm not a member. We have employee representatives elected for non union members and have sent through some questions to them to try and get clarification on some points.

We are all being asked to select a preference next week. Choices being:

Redundancy
Current role in new company
Redeployment within the new company

They have said that peoples difficulty will in getting to the new location will deem the role unsuitable but I suppose it all comes down to what they deem to be difficult.

I'll know more within the next few weeks I suppose. It's just frustrating, I'd happily stay and work in the Grand Canal office.

On another note the role that they are now mapping me into in the new company is an administrator role although I am a Team Leader in my current role. Can I be put into a lower role. My salary is higher but I 've been told this wont change when I move over

nibtrix

Bean club wrote: »

On another note the role that they are now mapping me into in the new company is an administrator role although I am a Team Leader in my current role. Can I be put into a lower role. My salary is higher but I 've been told this wont change when I move over

I don't think so, if the new role they are offering you involves a reduction in terms and conditions or in status then you are entitled to seek redundancy instead, according to this Citizens Information page - http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/unemployment_and_redundancy/redundancy/redundancy_procedures.html

Bandana boy

The time it takes you to travel to Maynooth would not really be a factor its all about distance
30Km I think is certainly worth a conversation but no guarantee , the change in title is a clear case of redundancy imo , and if you push based on this and the distance I would be pretty certain you will be successful in claiming redundancy.

Offering you redundancy , then withdrawing it as your role being still required but then downgrading your title is really strange.

Sounds completely like amateur hour to be fair , I suspect the Budget for this is under threat of being broken and somebody is scrambling to try and get it back under control.

dreamers75

This company has space in Maynooth but not in Grand Canal, under TUPE they have given you plenty of notice along with the 70 odd others moving. TUPE is fairly rock solid I doubt they are offering you less or any change in your terms. This is sadly not beneficial to you, I would assume there may be someone in your office who lives in/near Maynooth who is delighted about this.

Bandana boy wrote: »

Sounds completely like amateur hour to be fair , I suspect the Budget for this is under threat of being broken and somebody is scrambling to try and get it back under control.

If there was prize for being 100% spot on, you have it in the bag.

frogstar

dreamers75 wrote: »

This company has space in Maynooth but not in Grand Canal, under TUPE they have given you plenty of notice along with the 70 odd others moving. TUPE is fairly rock solid I doubt they are offering you less or any change in your terms. This is sadly not beneficial to you, I would assume there may be someone in your office who lives in/near Maynooth who is delighted about this.




If there was prize for being 100% spot on, you have it in the bag.

Having read the thread, it's clear to me who the company you are being TUPEd to is.

Amateur hour is totally correct. My own opinion is that they are completely over stretched in the market. It's not a place I would like to work for .I've had friends work in the grand canal office to be told they are also moving out to maynooth. Didn't suit my friends at all but nothing they could do about it.

charlietheminxx

I am in a similar situation at the moment.
Offered redundancy and then the offer was rescinded, saying it was only suggested as a possible option and was not actually offered. Seems that a lot of employers are abusing TUPE at the moment.