seniority query

K

kkmaan

Registered User
Messages
57
unusual query here. one multinational company owns two entirely different businesses in different buildings but are side-by-side. one business/building is now to close. employees are both unionised and non-unionised. the md states that lay-offs only affect employees in the business thats set to close, employees in the other building/business will not be affected.
now, employees in the closing business are claiming seniority over the employees in the other business and want to take their jobs with union backing.
the md says skill sets have to stay in place so ignores the unions plea. the site agreement states that "skill-sets have to stay in place according to business needs"
this may sound cut and dried, but the thing is that seniority was always recognised before, and employees often move from one business/building to the other based on seniority.
anyone have any advice on this? thanks
 
Re: ignoring seniority

I don't see how they could have a case.

Different jobs , and it's the jobs been made redundant.
 
From anecdotal evidence it's a complex situation with seniority, etc. While "last in first out" is no longer a true principle, there is some evidence that the Labour Courts still apply it.

However, this seems to be more where there hasn't been a sound selection process put in place/justification for redundancy.

Skills, ability etc are valid reasons, but if that's the process, then it would have to be to defined criteria and fairly applied. It depends on the task and role, but when some employers consider skills they tend to focus on tangible things like qualification. And while that's a small part it can ignore the knowledge and skill of experience and workers who may be as able as their younger colleagues, but never had the opportunity to gain the qualification.

In all, there is no absolute protection for seniority unless stipulated in a contract, however, if selecting based upon skill or ability, then the criteria must be clear and fair and the selection applied to the stated criteria.
 
It seems to me that if senority was recognised in the past and staff moved from one company to the other solely on this basis, then senority has to be recognised equally as a basis for redundancy.
 
declanja said:
It seems to me that if senority was recognised in the past and staff moved from one company to the other solely on this basis, then senority has to be recognised equally as a basis for redundancy.
Click to expand...
yes that is a fair point, but in this case its written in the site agreement that business needs come before seniority in the case of redundancy. seniority was recognised in the past but the company now chooses to ignore seniority. i think this might turn messy...
 
update. the md has stated that he is well within his rights to ignore seniority, and refuses to negotiate with unions on the matter. can he do this?
 
kkmaan said:
update. the md has stated that he is well within his rights to ignore seniority, and refuses to negotiate with unions on the matter. can he do this?
Click to expand...

Yes.

As long as his terms for selection are deemed to be fair.

I would consider skills to be a fair reason for selection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top