Hi, this situation will not automatically amount to redundancy because for that to happen the employer needs to have to reduce its employees doing a particular job. If there is no need to actually reduce the headcount then no redundancy will exist so she cannot claim to be facing a redundancy situation.
Instead this would need to be dealt with through the laws on changes to contracts. I know you said she does not have a written contract but there will still be an implied contract in place, the terms of which would be determined by what has been consistently applied over time and what has been agreed between them. So for example if she has always (apart from the temporary changes) been paid a set salary then it is likely that this would be an implied contractual term and changing it now would amount to a variation of her contract of employment.
There are a few ways in which an employer may try and make changes to an employee’s contract of employment. These are by:
If the changes are introduced without the employee's consent, then the following options are available:
1. Start working on the new terms but making it clear in writing that you are working ‘under protest’. This means that you do not agree with the changes but feel forced to do so. In the meantime you should try and resolve the issue either by informal discussions or by raising a formal grievance.
2. If the changes fundamentally impact the contract, for example changes to pay, duties, place of work, etc., you may wish to consider resigning and claiming constructive dismissal. The resignation must be done without unreasonable delay so as not to give the impression that the changes had been accepted. The claim must be submitted in an employment tribunal within 3 months of resigning and is subject to you having at least 2 years' continuous service. You would then seek compensation for loss of earnings resulting from the employer's actions.
3. If the employment is terminated and the employer offers re-engagement on the new terms that could potentially amount to unfair dismissal. However, the employer can try and justify the dismissal and the changes if they had a sound business reason for doing so. This could be pressing business needs requiring drastic changes for the company to survive. If no such reason exists, you can make a claim for unfair dismissal in an employment tribunal. The same time limit of 3 months to claim and the requirement to have 2 years' continuous would apply.
Hope this clarifies your position? If you could please let me know that would be great, thank you
Hello, I see you have accessed and read my answer to your query. Please let me know if this has answered your original question or if you need me to clarify anything else for you in relation to this? I just need to know whether to close the question or not? Thanks
Hi, in terms of sick pay she would only be entitled to whatever is in her contract. For example if she is not entitled to full pay under her contract then she cannot expect that. However, this could change if she has always been paid full pay if she went off sick, in which case she could claim this has become an implied contractual change but it needs to be something which was applied consistently and it was clearly communicated to her and others that it was the case. In that event it could amount to a breach of implied terms and conditions.A redundancy only occurs if the employer needs to reduce the number of employees, not if they just need to cut costs by reducing pay, so that is why such situations will not always amount to a redundancy, although as mentioned she can consider constructive dismissal instead.Hope this answers your follow up query?
Yes, thanks Ben.
you are welcome, all the best