Redundancy or Unfair Dismissal?

Hi, I've been in my job since 22/3/10 and have been told this week that I am being made redundant. My role is being made redundant because business in the area hasn't taken off the way they thought. No blame is being attributed to me in fact they like me and tyhe way I work.

There are two other people in the same role as me (in a senior role) covering different areas and an additional area with a vacancy. I've been offered the vacant role but it involves moving house which is something I don't want to do due to my partner having recently moving in.

They have said they do not want to stick to employment law and want to talk sensibly and although their preference is for me to take the vacant role they asked me what I would want if I were to leave. (To which I replied Roy Hodgson had jiust been sacked and awarded £7.5m!) They have though said their preferred option would be for me to take the other role. They said a year's salary was out of question but hinted at 6 or 4 months salary and possible tax benefits.

I've been in post less than a year and I was of the understanding that I had no employment rights and as such they could just let me go. I'm confused as I have two bad options, either move, when I don't want to or leave and accept a pay-off that I'm cofused about and I'm not sure if I'm being lulled into a false situation. Please help!

No false situation here - you have it correct. The answer to your question, in real terms, is neither. It isn't unfair dismissal because you don't qaulify to claim it and it isn't redundancy because you don't qualify to claim unfair dismissal / redundancy payments. That's the legal position. To be utterly honest, despite the fact that I only represent employees (so no great fan of employers!) - I think they are completely bonkers. To pay someone 4 or six months pay off after working for them for 9 months - they have more money than sense. Which would eem to be an answer of sorts!

Thanks, that's really interesting and useful! It's definitely an odd one and I suspect they don't want to upset me or to be seen to have a poor reputation hence this offer. I also think they like me and feel genuinely bad.

I think the reason they have a little concern is that the HR Business Partner suggested that they should go through a selection process with all three of us and as such cause disruption, cost them money and potentially unsettle a large amount of people.

Still, if what you say is right, I need to be careful that they aren't just trying to lull me into a false sense of security with a view to getting rid on the cheap when I make the decision no to take the other role.

The HR partner is being technically (although not legally) cautious. Which is nice to see, because a lot of company HR people would just see "less than 12 months"!!!! If you make sure that everything is in writing, then it is proveable as to what the deal is - and you could ask in a very nice way for it to be put in writing. But the simple fact is that you have no rights here - so if they refuse it may prove that the last guess is correct, but there is nothing that you can do unless you can prove a contracted offer. Your only right here is to notice pay - so I would suggest that the phrase about "gift horses" applies.

Thank you for your assistance, it's much appreciated; I'll have to be cautious when I speak with them!!