I just got laid off but must train replacement

stainluss

I’m being laid off but I am training someone (who may or may not have a different job title) to replace me. I given just a month’s notice.

What are the relevant laws governing this situation?

I figured layoffs were when there was no more work to do but in this case I’m training my replacement so perhaps it constitutes a firing? In this case I wasn’t given prior warning, proof etc

We’re a remote company so its possible that my replacement (who lives in different country) is employed by a different national entity, if that makes a difference.

C3PO

How long have you been employed in the role?

stainluss

[Please delete this comment]

stainluss

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119585979#Comment_119585979

Close to a year, past probation etc.

It’s possible your job is outsourced to another supplier based abroad? What does the written communication say? I’d be looking for a strong reference NOW before the “training” month is up-it worries me that you don’t know whether you’re being fired or made redundant - you need to pay a bit more attention as to what’s going on in your work life

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119586295#Comment_119586295

They don't qualify for redundancy having only been there under a year.

stainluss

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119586295#Comment_119586295

Sorry I misworded, the tasks are definitely going to a co-worker within the same company (but most companies have a different legal entity per-country) who has just been hired. The only bit I was unsure about was job title, they might have additional tasks beyond what I do, but they will be doing what I currently do also.

Flinty997

Sounds like they've rolled two (or more) jobs into one cheaper person.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119586342#Comment_119586342

What does the written communication say? This is important- you need to be able to tell your next employer under what circumstances you left your previous employment. If you’re being let go due to rationalisation or outsourcing or downsizing then fine- but if you’re being fired for some performance or other behavioural issue that’s a totally different thing and it will impact your next employment prospects

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119586330#Comment_119586330

I know but you can still be made redundant - why they’re leaving their current work impacts hugely on future employment prospects

irishgeo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058262379/i-just-got-laid-off-but-must-train-replacement

Id start calling in sick. It's not up to you to train your replacement. I'm surprised the company did it this. Usually they would hire your replacement and tell you he is there to help you. You would you train them and then they would let you go.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119588060#Comment_119588060

The OP mentions that the work is been moved to another country and another state. It is not unusually in some states to exiting employee to train up the replacement and unless there is something in the contract to preventing it, it is expected. It won't take a genius to figure out the game if the OP starts calling in sick, next stop the company doctor and immediate dismissal. When people want to get shot of you, the last thing you should do is make it easier for them, especially it it might cost you money.

delboythedub

Time to pull an extra sickie

C3PO

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119586265#Comment_119586265

In which case you can be let go with no real comeback available to you.

RobAMerc

you must train your replacement or else what ? they will fire you ? you are not entitled to redundancy so..... what exactly can they do ?

By the time they have figured it out it will be easier to pay you off the last few weeks and just be rid of you.

screamer

They must make the role redundant and not the person. I’d say you should get advice from an employment solicitor because seeing the absolute tripe the WRC has been awarding compensation for of late, you may well have a case. You should find out. Not a hope I’d train a replacement when I’m being made redundant.

Ubbquittious

I'd just ghost em, take yer stuff and go. Wouldn't be bothered entertaining their silly demands any further

Strumms

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119591923#Comment_119591923

This, I’d just walk…

print any emails or correspondence relating to this situation and leave. In the middle of a shift the day the new person starts to ensure maximum confusion and inconvenience…

Mrs OBumble

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119591917#Comment_119591917

The role is redundant: it's been moved from Ireland to another, likely lower cost, geography.

In a WFH world, this will happen more often than ever.

OP focus on making sure you have a good reference from the company.

screamer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119592518#Comment_119592518

Companies don’t give references any more. They literally will just give the dates you eirked there from and to. As such, not worth the paper they are written on.

Ubbquittious

You could be plamasing and turning the other cheek to the fella who made you redundant all day long and taking your replacement out for drinks in the evening and if it's a small enough industry where all the moguls know each other you can still get vilified at the golf course or at some convention.

CrookedJack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119592518#Comment_119592518

To be more accurate, the role is not redundant but it is being moved to another, lower-cost employee. This is not legal and would be reasonable grounds for unfair dismissal in the WRC. It's very hard for an employer to argue that a role is no longer needed when they have OP training their replacement. Employers cannot legally just let people go if they find someone who can do their job for less money.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119592992#Comment_119592992

The work is being transferred to another legal entity in a foreign country. The job will not longer exist in Ireland.

skallywag

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119592770#Comment_119592770

You are correct when it comes to a written reference, but it is still very common to call up a previous employer for a reference. I would not hire someone without doing the same.

HBC08

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119592518#Comment_119592518

Haha! " a good reference "

Solid advice from the 90s there.

skallywag

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119596338#Comment_119596338

You clearly have no idea how the professional world works. If you want to get hired into any role of any importance you will need to have someone of signifigance at a former workplace who will vouch for you.

You must be very naive to think otherwise.

Beau

Book some time in with a solicitor ASAP. I was in a similar situation last year and it was the best money I've ever spent.

Donald Trump

Does your company not start to remove access to their systems once they know you are leaving?

Especially if it is them making the decision to kick you out!

skallywag

OP, forgive me if this sounds harsh, but I believe that it is accurate.

If you are not even in a role for 12 months, then you can anyway be fired for convenience? i.e. without any comeback? And without the employer providing any justification.

CrookedJack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119596284#Comment_119596284

But it will still exist and so is not the person doing it is not redundant. The employer has stated that is their reason for ending the OPs employment, and in an unfair dismissal case the onus will be on them to prove that. Simply moving the role to another legal entity will not be sufficient for the WRC, if they have had the OP training his replacement.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119596759#Comment_119596759

Even were that true they have not said they were firing him for convenience, they've said his role was redundant, which would then need to be true for this to be a fair dismissal.

skallywag

CrookedJack > Even were that true they have not said they were firing him for convenience, they've said his role was redundant, which would then need to be true for this to be a fair dismissal.

That is a valid point.

OP, can you clarify what the exact wording was when you were terminated, and whether or not you were given any feedback on poor performance, etc. I know you wrote 'laid off' but that can mean different things to different people sometime.