Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Wary I’ll be fired to avoid paying out redundancy.

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    storker
    Registered Users Posts: 5,672 ✭✭✭storker


    Also, rehearse the meeting in your mind several times. Try to anticipate the worst things that you think might be said to you and have your responses and reactions ready, so that you're less likely to be dumbstruck or let your emotions take over if thrown a curve-ball. If you have the moral high-ground, make sure you react in a way that keeps you there. Remain calm no matter what, in case someone is deliberately trying to provoke you. In such circumstances, remaining calm can make the other person lose the rag instead. Have you evidence to hand, and post-it marked or whatever so you can go straight to the relevant bit. Make it look like you have your sh1t together, and that they're the ones making it up as they go along. Let your professionalism stand in stark contrast to their chicanery (assuming that's what's going on).


  • Options
    #33
    skallywag
    Registered Users Posts: 3,000 ✭✭✭skallywag


    bullpost wrote: »
    I have seen at least one situation of a new manager putting a long-serving employee who up to that point has a good performance record onto a PIP in order to bring in their own recruited employees, so its not always straightforward.

    I get your point, this does happen, I have also seen it. I have never seen such a case though where the long term employee would have been shafted with redundancy payments that were due when they were finally let go, which I think is the OP's main concern.


  • Options
    #34
    devnull
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 11,670 Mod ✭✭✭✭devnull


    alias no.9 wrote: »
    Summary dismissal is reserved for instances of gross misconduct. It is not a remedy for performance issues, real or contrived, without going through some kind of performance improvement plan, verbal warning(s) and written warning(s).

    You will never have a meeting scheduled days in advance, of which the purpose of is to be fired there and then, since they would be in a bad place to defend any unfair dismissal claim, since an employment law expert will simply argue that if the act was so serious to warrant summary dismissal, then it wouldn't have took them a few days to do so, thus completely undermining their action.
    bullpost wrote: »
    I have seen at least one situation of a new manager putting a long-serving employee who up to that point has a good performance record onto a PIP in order to bring in their own recruited employees, so its not always straightforward.

    Yes, this can and does happen, I've seen it happen to others and it happened to me as well. Fortunately I have a solicitor with employment law experience in my extended family so a 9 month campaign of trying to force me out through every trick in the book didn't work and in the end I was asked how much money I wanted to leave, asked for an amount, pulled out at the last minute and asked for a little more, got it and spent the next 9 months living off the settlement.

    There's also a type of manager who doesn't like it if someone in their department is very popular within it as they have to be top dog so instead they will spend their whole time trying to undermine said person and going through everything they do with a fine tooth comb to try and find something against them and then claim they found it during a random audit.


  • Options
    #35
    LegacyUser
    Registered Users Posts: 166,026 ✭✭✭✭LegacyUser


    JUST TO STATE THAT I AM NO LONGER CONCERNED ABOUT A REASON FOR GETTING FIRED, MORE THE FACT I AM BEING TREATED EXTREMELY UNFAVOURABLY COMPARED TO EVERY OTHER IRISH EMPLOYEE WHO WAS EVER MADE REDUNDANT.

    I think I have some grounds so am currently working through that process.


  • Options
    #36
    skallywag
    Registered Users Posts: 3,000 ✭✭✭skallywag


    OP. are you certain now that they are trying to fire you without having to pay redundancy, or is it still all conjecture at the moment?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Guffy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,093 ✭✭✭Guffy


    Nervousemployee wrote: »
    Hi all,
    Thanks for the advice.

    It’s been a tough few days so apologies for not replying. The meeting was pretty straight forward but things going up the creek today after first consultation.

    Every single employee that has gone through the door here has received 2 weeks statutory and 4 weeks per years service, uncapped as to length of service.

    They are offering me a sum that is essentially 2 weeks statutory and then about a week extra per year. Basically it looks like they are paying me extra the difference between my weekly wage and the weekly cap of 600 that is on the statutory.

    To say I’m let down and hurt is a massive understatement


    I think people missed this post.


  • Options
    #38
    skallywag
    Registered Users Posts: 3,000 ✭✭✭skallywag


    Guffy wrote: »
    I think people missed this post.

    Yes, I certainly did for some reason. Did it just appear now or something? :confused:

    OP, why do you think that they are offering you less than your redundancy entitlement? What justification was given?


  • Options
    #39
    RebelButtMunch
    Registered Users Posts: 2,383 ✭✭✭RebelButtMunch


    Tough luck man.
    I've seen it in a previous role
    First people to be made redundant Lump+statutory + 6 weeks per year uncapped
    Few years later Lump+statutory + 6 weeks per year capped at 10 years
    Next time, Lump+statutory + 4 weeks per year capped at 5 years

    Not much you can do about it I think


  • Options
    #40
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,432 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    TheWonderLlama wrote: »
    Do not do that.

    That is most likely a breach of contract.

    It provides a reason to discipline you and the evidence.


  • Options
    #41
    high_king
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭high_king


    RebelButtMunch wrote: »
    Tough luck man.
    I've seen it in a previous role
    First people to be made redundant Lump+statutory + 6 weeks per year uncapped
    Few years later Lump+statutory + 6 weeks per year capped at 10 years
    Next time, Lump+statutory + 4 weeks per year capped at 5 years

    Not much you can do about it I think

    That chimes with a lot of people's experience . . the first Voluntary Redundancy offer is usually the best one to go for.

    Also contrary to HR style thinking, it's very often some of the best employees, who can easily find work somewhere else . . that are usually the first to grab it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    TheDoc
    Registered Users Posts: 23,137 ✭✭✭✭TheDoc


    nogoodnamesleft wrote: »
    With the email data you will also have header information, read receipts, cc lists, positions in the company attachments, etc etc. Over a career of 15 years that's a lot of info to print. If he also prints that volume of info at work it may raise suspicion via the print queue, volume or content.

    Boot from C.D with a imaging tool, take a virtual image saved onto an external hard disk, leave it for a few hours. Job done rather than the time taken to print or invariably forgetting something.

    This is dreadful advice. Arranging non sanctioned images or backups of company data is a serious issue and grounds for dismissal and in cases legal discourse.

    You don’t own your work email , your company does along with all information within and you retain no rights to it or ownership.


  • Options
    #43
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    RebelButtMunch wrote: »
    Tough luck man.
    I've seen it in a previous role
    First people to be made redundant Lump+statutory + 6 weeks per year uncapped
    Few years later Lump+statutory + 6 weeks per year capped at 10 years
    Next time, Lump+statutory + 4 weeks per year capped at 5 years

    Not much you can do about it I think


    Yes, it usually gets worse towards the end of the business in a particular area, because near the end they don't really care about the employee, they've managed around them.


    But, it's a good jobs market out there, OP. Chin up.


  • Options
    #44
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    high_king wrote: »
    Also contrary to HR style thinking, it's often some of the best employees, who can easily find work somewhere else . . that are usually the first to grab it.


    Contrary to what thinking? Everybody knows this to be fair, and not just in redundancy situations.


  • Options
    #45
    high_king
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭high_king


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Contrary to what thinking? Everybody knows this to be fair, and not just in redundancy situations.

    This isn't true, many HR types I've talked to often think they are going to get rid of the wasters with a voluntary redundancy scheme.


  • Options
    #46
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    high_king wrote: »
    This isn't true, many HR types I've talked to often think they are going to get rid of the wasters with a voluntary redundancy scheme.


    I think you might be a tad biased. Anyone in HR longer than a fine day knows that it's the most capable that are the most mobile and therefore the most likely to leave redundancy or not.



    We know it, and so do HR professionals.


  • Options
    #47
    high_king
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭high_king


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I think you might be a tad biased. Anyone in HR longer than a fine day knows that it's the most capable that are the most mobile and therefore the most likely to leave redundancy or not.

    We know it, and so do HR professionals.

    Facts are not bias. I've heard this false claim about redundancy many times from so called HR professional and managers.
    Who is this "we" you claim to speak for / represent ?


  • Options
    #48
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    high_king wrote: »
    Facts are not bias. I've heard this false claim about redundancy many times from so called HR professional and managers.
    Who is this "we" you claim to speak for / represent ?

    Anecdotes may be facts to you, but not so to anyone else.

    But, perhaps you're right, and you and I and any one else I know are smarter than the HR professionals. Maybe.


  • Options
    #49
    high_king
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭high_king


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Anecdotes may be facts to you, but not so to anyone else.

    But, perhaps you're right, and you and I and any one else I know are smarter than the HR professionals. Maybe.

    Actual HR people, events and reality are not "Anecdotes", and it's got nothing to do with "smarter"


Advertisement