Journal turgid's Journal: TUPE and Redundancy (IANAL) 4
I work for an American company in the UK. I've had a very happy 4 years there so far but now they're selling us and many of our American and European colleagues to an Indian outsourcing company to cut costs.
This isn't IT outsourcing - we're Engineers: software, and mechanical, physicists, chemists and technicians. Yes, there are some IT support people involved too.
They're calling it a "partnership" rather than "outsourcing." That's to make us feel better. Our new employer is going to get new business for us with other companies, allegedly, so we will have lots of opportunities to work on cool, new stuff.
As I previously said, we lucky people in the UK are protected by laws called TUPE which are supposed to ensure that we keep the same terms and conditions of employment under our new employer. In theory, all that should change is the company name on the pay cheque.
However,. as you can imagine, these things are complex and European and UK laws tend to get set by precedent i.e. arguing things out in court. Being in the computery-type electronics-thingymabob industry very few people are in a union so there is no union representation.
I am (a hangover from my nuclear days) but they can't represent me officially because there needs to be a certain proportion of the workforce at a site for union representation to be legally enforced...
I've been taking some private advice on my personal circumstances from my union (prospect.org.uk). It was the Engineers and Managers Association when I joined 15 years ago. I've kept up my payments.
Our new Ts&Cs are not as good as our current ones. The new employer has weaseled out of everything it can to get us as cheaply as possible. We're losing out most significantly on pensions.
I was pleasantly surprised to hear one piece of advice from my professional association regarding potential redundancies, though.
During a TUPE transfer, "they" are allowed to make redundancies for "economic, technical or organisational reasons" (ETO). The thing is, they also have to be seen to be "consulting" before the transfer by law. That means that the existing employers have to make sure that their affected staff elect (or have appointed) representatives from their own ranks to engage in negotiations with the existing employer and the prospective employer. As part of the consultation process, the employers involved have to state up front whether people will be made redundant (or if the possibility exists) for ETO reasons as part of the transfer. Strictly speaking, positions are made redundant, not people. Any dismissal not for ETO reasons is automatically deemed "unfair" in law and the dismissed employee can take the employer to an Industrial Tribunal. (In the UK you have to be employed for at least one year for this to apply - under a year you can get the boot for no reason at all and have no redress).
What this means is that , if they didn't warn of the possibility of redundancies during the consultation period, and if they then go on to make redundancies, they are "unfair" and the staff affected can take them to court.
We have not been informed of the possibility of redundancies after the transfer. No one is being made redundant before the transfer.
Maybe things aren't that bad after all...
You might want to think about joining a union. They're not all foaming-at-the-mouth raving commies like the Arthur Scargill ones of the 70s and early 80s. Even if they can't officially represent you, they can offer a great deal of good, accurate advice.
universal (Score:2)
I believe that applies to everyone who works for pay.
"Foaming at the mouth" or not, workers organizing has done more to advance the lives of everyone, including non-union members, than just about any other advance since the Industrial Revolution.
TUPE (Score:2)
Errr... but doesn't that violate TUPE? I know that when I went through this, the new employer wasn't allowed to change the T&Cs at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Most things are covered by TUPE but they are sneakily making our pensions less favourable and some other minor things - anything that can be argued is "non-contractual."
If I thought I'd be working for them for the rest of my life I'd be more worried. It's the over 50's that are worst hit. They are getting totally hit on their pensions.
Re: (Score:2)
The other wonderful thing about this deal (which is getting worse all the time) is that some people were allegedly (we have still to get this confirmed) been told in personal meetings with the new employer that any of these wonderful new, exciting projects will not be brought on to our site since "the cost would be prohibitive."
They told us that they wanted to turn our site into a "centre of excellence" where we could do high-tech work for many and varied customers.
The thing is, if we want to transfer to wo