having read my post you have come to some pretty interesting conclusions about me and the company I work for.
Firstly, I do not believe this employee to be "guilty before proven innocent". In fact I do not believe him to be guilty at all and I am glad that he is not. Prior to him being signed off, me, his own manager and other senior managers were at pains to confirm to him that he was not under suspicion. As you will notice, my post was some weeks ago now and this is done and dusted.
Our company does not have a culture of treating employees with suspicion - quite the reverse in fact. We have an open, caring paternalistic culture.
"Have you pointed him towards some form of support service eg EAP" - of course I have. Details of our EAP were contained in my first letter to him.
"have you sent them a letter to acknowledge receipt of the Fit Note, make sure they are supported and who to contact for further help?" - of course I have. I have sent a letter after each fit note acknowledging receipt, advising of our support and contact details, suggesting pre-return meetings and to discuss a re-entry plan
"Have you conducted a wellbeing telephone call just to see how the employee is doing?" - No, I didn't do this as when I made the suggestion in my first letter he replied that he did not feel well enough to speak to anyone from the company on the phone and we have respected his wishes. When you have more experience in HR Kansel, you will learn that there are appropriate ways to approach issues and current advice is not to contact those signed off with stress in order not to add to their situation.
So, as you can see, we are providing every support to this employee and he is being handled very gently.
As it is, I have received a letter from him today stating the reasons for his stress and apologising for not bringing it to the attention of anyone. He states that he was too proud to speak to anyone and believed that he could sort the situation himself. YOu will no doubt want to comment at this stage that this reluctance was down to company culture and that his manager should have noticed the signs, however, there were no signs. Even his closest colleagues had no idea of the strain he was under and there were no issues with the quality and quantity of his work.
Thank you to the experienced colleagues who were able to give useful advice to my query. However, the situation is now solved and the query is closed.
the answer you have received above is correct - you can be made redundant during maternity leave, but maternity must not be the reason for redundancy, the same criteria will apply to all employees.
I would just add, that if her redundancy is confirmed during her mat leave, the redundancy does not take effect until the end of her AML (if she is entitled to it).
For example, I currently have an employee on mat leave who left to have her baby in February this year. The site she works at has closed down and her role ceased to exist at the end of June this year. However, she has chosen to exercise her right to her full maternity leave and so she will receive her severance payment in February next year. We continued to pay her maternity pay as usual.
I am tempted to think that there is not a definitive reply to my question which was the reason for posting. Should I take action or not?
Personally, I am not convinced of his reasons for absence. There is currently a police investigation for fraud ongoing in this guy's department and as well as being the last person to handle the cheques which have gone missing and been cashed, he has been main liaison with the police and following their 2nd visit last week, he called in sick for 2 days and then was signed off for a month with stress. I don't want to make any accusations but I think he could be circling the wagons.
My sincere wish is that he is totally innocent in this situation and we get to the bottom of the fraud and his reason for absence.
I'm pleased that your time away from work dealt with your stress and I hope this is the same for our employee.
A new company only has to take over contractual benefits (except pension) and those which can be proved to be contractual by custom and practice as policymakers reply.
However, once these are taken over, they are taken over forever. The new company must honour existing terms even 5 years in the future unless they can buy them out or improve on them. Even after that length of time, they will be in breach of contract if they try to remove contractual benefits.
I have never heard of the 13 week rule in this situation except if you agree to underwrite for that period, however, the terms in the above paragraph still remain.
It sounds like the new company are trying it on. I should get a solicitor involved.
You should offer this role to the person being made redundant, but you need to make a decision as to whether you feel that the new role is 'suitable alternative employment'.
If it is and the person being made redundant turns it down, then they are deemed to have resigned and will not receive their redundancy package. However, due to the lower salary, you may decide that it is not 'suitable alternative employment' and they can take their package if they turn it down.
I think you should make the offer anyway and leave it to the employee decide what they want to do in the current economic climate - remain in work on a lower salary or take a package and look for alternative employment elsewhere.
Thanks to both of you for replies. They have clarified the situation.
The employee initially had his request turned down and then gave in his resignation but due to the circumstances, his manager would like to do something to help him out so we have agreed to the vol. red. under the wire as it were and I can see now that I have some scope for negotiating terms.
thanks for your comments. You have confirmed just what I thought would be the case. I already have remote working teams that I manage from and HR perspective and the people involved in this scenario are used to working at other sites around europe so although their base is stated in their existing contracts, they are rarely there.
If the maternity leave comes to an end in January and your employee was not pregnant then she would return to work as arranged. The fact that her next baby is due in May is irrelevant to her return and the statutory procedure should still be followed ref notification periods.
She should be advised, however, that her 90% maternity pay may be affected depending on her earnings/return during the reference period.
At my company, I ensure we use probation periods to their maximum effect. During the first 3 months of employment, the notice period is just one week, rising, generally to one month at the end of the period.
I diarise the end of the probation period and also 2 weeks beforehand to remind me to email the manager concerned to confirm that employment can be confirmed. This works well for us and is very simple.
In the event that someone is not performing during their probation period, it is invariably spotted very early on and if no improvements after 2 months in, then I will meet with the manager to define objectives for the employee concerned and extend their probation period for a month or 2 at that time. The manager has a meeting with the employee to communicate the objectives and extension date and then they will meet again fortnightly to discuss progress.
The important thing to remember if you are not going to confirm a probation period is to act before the end of it as if you miss the date then the employee rolls over to, by default, their contractual notice period.
My discussion replies
Kansel
having read my post you have come to some pretty interesting conclusions about me and the company I work for.
Firstly, I do not believe this employee to be "guilty before proven innocent". In fact I do not believe him to be guilty at all and I am glad that he is not. Prior to him being signed off, me, his own manager and other senior managers were at pains to confirm to him that he was not under suspicion. As you will notice, my post was some weeks ago now and this is done and dusted.
Our company does not have a culture of treating employees with suspicion - quite the reverse in fact. We have an open, caring paternalistic culture.
"Have you pointed him towards some form of support service eg EAP" - of course I have. Details of our EAP were contained in my first letter to him.
"have you sent them a letter to acknowledge receipt of the Fit Note, make sure they are supported and who to contact for further help?" - of course I have. I have sent a letter after each fit note acknowledging receipt, advising of our support and contact details, suggesting pre-return meetings and to discuss a re-entry plan
"Have you conducted a wellbeing telephone call just to see how the employee is doing?" - No, I didn't do this as when I made the suggestion in my first letter he replied that he did not feel well enough to speak to anyone from the company on the phone and we have respected his wishes. When you have more experience in HR Kansel, you will learn that there are appropriate ways to approach issues and current advice is not to contact those signed off with stress in order not to add to their situation.
So, as you can see, we are providing every support to this employee and he is being handled very gently.
As it is, I have received a letter from him today stating the reasons for his stress and apologising for not bringing it to the attention of anyone. He states that he was too proud to speak to anyone and believed that he could sort the situation himself. YOu will no doubt want to comment at this stage that this reluctance was down to company culture and that his manager should have noticed the signs, however, there were no signs. Even his closest colleagues had no idea of the strain he was under and there were no issues with the quality and quantity of his work.
Thank you to the experienced colleagues who were able to give useful advice to my query. However, the situation is now solved and the query is closed.
Thank you
Hello
the answer you have received above is correct - you can be made redundant during maternity leave, but maternity must not be the reason for redundancy, the same criteria will apply to all employees.
I would just add, that if her redundancy is confirmed during her mat leave, the redundancy does not take effect until the end of her AML (if she is entitled to it).
For example, I currently have an employee on mat leave who left to have her baby in February this year. The site she works at has closed down and her role ceased to exist at the end of June this year. However, she has chosen to exercise her right to her full maternity leave and so she will receive her severance payment in February next year. We continued to pay her maternity pay as usual.
Hope this helps.
Thank you for your reply Clare.
I am tempted to think that there is not a definitive reply to my question which was the reason for posting. Should I take action or not?
Personally, I am not convinced of his reasons for absence. There is currently a police investigation for fraud ongoing in this guy's department and as well as being the last person to handle the cheques which have gone missing and been cashed, he has been main liaison with the police and following their 2nd visit last week, he called in sick for 2 days and then was signed off for a month with stress. I don't want to make any accusations but I think he could be circling the wagons.
My sincere wish is that he is totally innocent in this situation and we get to the bottom of the fraud and his reason for absence.
I'm pleased that your time away from work dealt with your stress and I hope this is the same for our employee.
A new company only has to take over contractual benefits (except pension) and those which can be proved to be contractual by custom and practice as policymakers reply.
However, once these are taken over, they are taken over forever. The new company must honour existing terms even 5 years in the future unless they can buy them out or improve on them. Even after that length of time, they will be in breach of contract if they try to remove contractual benefits.
I have never heard of the 13 week rule in this situation except if you agree to underwrite for that period, however, the terms in the above paragraph still remain.
It sounds like the new company are trying it on. I should get a solicitor involved.
You should offer this role to the person being made redundant, but you need to make a decision as to whether you feel that the new role is 'suitable alternative employment'.
If it is and the person being made redundant turns it down, then they are deemed to have resigned and will not receive their redundancy package. However, due to the lower salary, you may decide that it is not 'suitable alternative employment' and they can take their package if they turn it down.
I think you should make the offer anyway and leave it to the employee decide what they want to do in the current economic climate - remain in work on a lower salary or take a package and look for alternative employment elsewhere.
Hope this helps
Thanks to both of you for replies. They have clarified the situation.
The employee initially had his request turned down and then gave in his resignation but due to the circumstances, his manager would like to do something to help him out so we have agreed to the vol. red. under the wire as it were and I can see now that I have some scope for negotiating terms.
Thank you
Hello Peter
thanks for your comments. You have confirmed just what I thought would be the case. I already have remote working teams that I manage from and HR perspective and the people involved in this scenario are used to working at other sites around europe so although their base is stated in their existing contracts, they are rarely there.
If the maternity leave comes to an end in January and your employee was not pregnant then she would return to work as arranged. The fact that her next baby is due in May is irrelevant to her return and the statutory procedure should still be followed ref notification periods.
She should be advised, however, that her 90% maternity pay may be affected depending on her earnings/return during the reference period.
Hello Alan
At my company, I ensure we use probation periods to their maximum effect. During the first 3 months of employment, the notice period is just one week, rising, generally to one month at the end of the period.
I diarise the end of the probation period and also 2 weeks beforehand to remind me to email the manager concerned to confirm that employment can be confirmed. This works well for us and is very simple.
In the event that someone is not performing during their probation period, it is invariably spotted very early on and if no improvements after 2 months in, then I will meet with the manager to define objectives for the employee concerned and extend their probation period for a month or 2 at that time. The manager has a meeting with the employee to communicate the objectives and extension date and then they will meet again fortnightly to discuss progress.
The important thing to remember if you are not going to confirm a probation period is to act before the end of it as if you miss the date then the employee rolls over to, by default, their contractual notice period.
I hope this is useful.