header-logo header-logo

04 July 2013 / Tom Walker
Issue: 7567 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

The way to go

1713069981

Employers can now act with greater flexibility in a redundancy exercise, says Tom Walker

In today’s hard economic times, employers can act with greater flexibility in a redundancy exercise, but in turn are expected to show properly the thought and consideration that went into their decisions.

Perhaps this is in recognition of an obvious question: what is the point of a redundancy exercise unless it gives the best possible staffing structure to the business? There are still collective agreements to follow and many companies will have a redundancy procedure. More and more though, these general guidelines are only to be applied as appropriate to the needs of each situation. Indeed the ACAS Booklet on Redundancy Handling recommends that procedures include “room for manoeuvre”.

Over the years, we have seen the move away from rigid and impractical procedures. In terms of the pools, the selection criteria, the role of alternative employment and the order of the redundancy process, we are seeing the economic and organisational needs of the business gain more attention.

Business requirements

It

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll