Redundancy Offers-Are they applicable to all?
 

Just thought I would ask this as there are some bright sparks and legal beavers around who may know the answer to the following.

I work for a airline that recently took over, not merged-took over, another airline. Many of the pilots from the taken over airline are refusing to sign a contract with the takeover airline and amongst other things are claiming TUPE. The takeover airline is now offering pilots from the taken over airline redundancy payments as a possible solution to them refusing to sign the parent company's contract and become fully tangoed (clue!).

My question is this. If the company is offering some employees redundancy albeit because they are on a different contract, would mere mortals in the parent conpany also be eligible to claim redundancy. We are all now pilots employed by one company and even if some of us are on different terms and conditions, can the company legally offer redundancy to a specific group of pilots but not to others/all?

Thanking my erstwhile colleagues in advance.

I think you'll find the straight answer is 'No'.

I'm in a different trade to you but have recently had a narrow escape from redundancy.

Smells like not all is going well with the GB-Easy takeover?

My (extremely small) provincial company was sold (by me) 8 years ago. The larger company taking us over were required to keep staff contracts, and I got a new one as I was the only one without a contract of employment. If they wanted to change existing staff contracts this had to be by separate negotiation, and staff could, if they wish exercise all rights under employment law as if the new employer was the original one. Length of employment was seamless and continuous and cumulative.

Things may have changed but I suspect not.

You also need to establish the legal meaning of 'redundant'.

If you offered yourself up as redundant now would that mean that the company don't need you any more, you are superfluous? Would the new arrivals be better qualified than you and be able to slot into a vacancy that you are not currently qualified for?

This doesn't mean that the company can't choose to decide they are better off without you and then offer you an attractive severance package, note 'severance' and not 'redundancy'.

Check out

Business transfers and takeovers (TUPE) : Directgov - Employment

The 'voluntary severence' package being offered is about half that offered by quality companies like M&S. It's 'take the new contract' or 'we don't promise anything about the future' like promotion, base change and so on.

So, in short the new employer is not interested in maintaining /honouring contracts as required under law because it 'doesn't fit in with their business model'. The model is, in year one, to pay all staff and contract companies slightly less the going rate, charge passengers slightly less than the competition and fill the planes. In year two you tell staff and contractors that times are hard and that you can only keep the contract if you accept less than last year etc. Bonuses are then paid to top managers. No guarantee for the shareholders who after ten years haven't seen a single dividend. But buying competitors (as opposed to just being better and winning passengers while expanding) and changing staff contracts is apparently part of the business model.
Obviously anybody who wants to challenge this is welcome to go to court. Employees will need deep pockets to counter the expensive barristers employed by the company.

Slopwith,

Speak to your union (assuming you're a member). They will have access to specialist legal advice and no doubt have been speaking to many others in your shoes.

N14HK