Voluntary Redundancy?

[Spursman]

Hi,

I took Voluntary Redundancy back in July 2014 and left to join another company. Now I've been offered a job back at the company in a different division. I had the interview and i was waiting on salary.

I've just been told that i cant rejoin as i took VR.

is this correct? its been around 18 months.

is there anything i can do?

 

[Kenyan Spur]

This looks very stupid and suspicious.
First, they would / should have known that you took VR.
Therefore, why go through the interview process if according to the company you don't qualify because of the VR.
Maybe they want someone else, probably less qualified, but well connected and want to disqualify you because of the VR.
If I was running the company, I will employ the best talent available, irrespective of the VR. I have done that many times
before in my carrier.
Good Luck.

 

[johnola]

Probably an internal rule but agree they should compensate for wasting your time.

 

[Papercut]

Usually 6 weeks

 

[monkeybarry]

Agree re above, stupid internal rule
Get your prospective manager to fight your cause
It's not your fault the company had a restructuring/poor performance and needed to offer VR. They should be thankful you are willing to risk working there again

 

[dawaxman]

It should have said something in the documentation you would have signed when you took the redundancy originally

 

[Spursman]

Thanks for the responses. I didnt go through the normal route to get recruited again. I spoke directly to the regional manager. He then put me in touch with the area manager. Had the interview, got offered the job, was waiting on salary rate. The role i was doing before i took VR was in a different division with different management. The manager i interviewed for the current role knew i took VR only at interview stage.

I called Acas and they said its a company policy and by law/tax reasons its fine to go back after 18 months. I called the company and its being looked into. Hopefully i can get back in there. should find out today

Also nothing in the original documentation does it say anything about rejoining the company.

 

[Whiffler]

I took VR and the standard was 2yrs before returning ..... unless.

IIRC the 'unless' involved repaying some/all of redundancy or whatever, so that I would be back in the pension scheme. I understood this to be EU-wide pension conventions.

I could go back and read all the blurb, but there must be somewhere on the web that will be better informed than I.

Been gone 4½ years now, no intention of returning. Much more important that I burble and babble on GG.

PS - an after-thought ...... some of your ex-colleagues may resent your return. May have played a part.

 

[scaramanga]

I took VR and the standard was 2yrs before returning ..... unless.

IIRC the 'unless' involved repaying some/all of redundancy or whatever, so that I would be back in the pension scheme. I understood this to be EU-wide pension conventions.

I could go back and read all the blurb, but there must be somewhere on the web that will be better informed than I.

Been gone 4½ years now, no intention of returning. Much more important that I burble and babble on GG.

PS - an after-thought ...... some of your ex-colleagues may resent your return. May have played a part.

I imagine that's likely to be the reason.

I also assume there's some kind of variable timing based on the size of the payoff.

 

[Bullet]

I didn't realise there was a rule like this. Who benefits from this rule? If the employee agreed VR and then after a while the company wants to hire them back and they want to join... who benefits from this being stopped? I don't get it. Does the government not want this to happen because... um...?

 

[scaramanga]

I didn't realise there was a rule like this. Who benefits from this rule? If the employee agreed VR and then after a while the company wants to hire them back and they want to join... who benefits from this being stopped? I don't get it. Does the government not want this to happen because... um...?

The problem is that if someone were paid a year's salary for redundancy and then returned after a year, it would look like they'd been paid for a nice long holiday.

It's not in a company's interest for vr to look too enticing as good employees might end up going for it. In an ideal world only the more workshy ones would, therefore increasing the productivity of the workforce.

 

[Bullet]

The problem is that if someone were paid a year's salary for redundancy and then returned after a year, it would look like they'd been paid for a nice long holiday.

It's not in a company's interest for vr to look too enticing as good employees might end up going for it. In an ideal world only the more workshy ones would, therefore increasing the productivity of the workforce.

Hmm, I understand what you're saying but if you genuinely take VR and that is that. Ended. But then the company wins some new clients and suddenly wants experienced help, they should be free to hire you. It is a gamble, not great odds... but yeah I can see what you mean I guess. Horrible situation redundancy, I hated dealing with all that, people crying in the car park, everyone fearful, loads of sly nods and secret hushed discussions... just horrible.

 

[Spursman]

seems as if the issue was my written warning towards the end of my time there. It was for not delivering my sales figures. I was good for the first 6 years. left for 6 months, went back and was good for 2 years. The last 2 years was up and down.

All my good years were in the division i want to go back in, so i was told to email everything and ultimately it will prob go down to what the manager wants, which hopefully is still me!

 

[P.D.]

Hmm, I understand what you're saying but if you genuinely take VR and that is that. Ended. But then the company wins some new clients and suddenly wants experienced help, they should be free to hire you. It is a gamble, not great odds... but yeah I can see what you mean I guess. Horrible situation redundancy, I hated dealing with all that, people crying in the car park, everyone fearful, loads of sly nods and secret hushed discussions... just horrible.

Probably more because redundancy payouts are tax free up to 30K, probably a condition of this rule is re-joining in a certain time frame.

 

[Bullet]

Probably more because redundancy payouts are tax free up to 30K, probably a condition of this rule is re-joining in a certain time frame.

Interesting, I think I understand. You mean the government might view it as tax avoidance somehow, to pay someone a load of cash then rehire them.

 

[Spursman]

So basically im not being allowed to rejoin because of both my VR and as i was on a performance management thing due to low sales in the last few months before i left.

i did nearly 10 years service and for 8 years i was smashing it, its only when i moved divisions i was less consistent.

Shows loyalty counts for nothing in the end! I said to HR no one actually benefits either way with this so your policy needs to be treated on a case by case basis. She also denied that there was a job offer. I was told verbally that the manager of the team would like me back.

Oh well. not the end of the world.

 

[P.D.]

Interesting, I think I understand. You mean the government might view it as tax avoidance somehow, to pay someone a load of cash then rehire them.

Yes you get paid say 30K tax free, go join another company for a year then go back to them. That's 30K you've not paid tax on - I realise the 30K is meant in case you don't get another job as compensation for job loss but to HMRC it could look like a fiddle.

They could just write it off but I'm sure there are people who use tactical redundancy around.

There's probably all sorts of employment laws around it as well, made redundant, re-join and then sue them for making you redundant for x reason later e.g. you rate me as good enough to come back 9 months later so I'll sue you for the character defamation I suffered in those 9 months, depression because of it etc.