Department refusing to accept redundancy situation after ywo years service.

I was originally employed by the civil service on an 18 month contract to cover a 'short term peak in workloads,, which was subsequently extended for a further 9 months. Before the extension we had been given a letter saying that in was unlikely out contracts would be extended as they were expecting the workload to dry up, however the situation was reviewed and the extension given.

I am now in my last three months and have been told that it is now unlikely any further extension will be given. We have been told that the original letter saying that our contracts would not be extended is still valid for the same reason ie a lack of work.

I have stated to HR that as we have now worked over two years and as the reason give for not extending the contract again is because they expect there to be no work, this is Redundancy and we should be entitled to the same rights as a permanent employee. I have quoted the Employment Rights Act and their response is simply, 'The Department does not consider the expiry of a FTA, even after two years as a redundancy?'

Can anyone shed any further light on to this matter as I feel that I am getting fobbed off and they made an error when they extended the contracts over the two year period.

It depends on your point of view, but to all intents and purposes they are "more right" than you are. You are certainly entitled to redundancy pay; you are certainly entitled to be treated as redundant in relation to any possible suitable alternative work which may be available - you do not have the right to be treated as "permanant" employees and put their jobs at risk, because you are not and will not be entitled to ask to become "permanant" until you have served four years - and even then it could be refused on lawful grounds.

If a permanant employee was in the position that you are, they would have the right to be pooled and scored against others like them - this is not the case for you.

Many thanks for your reply.

I've resigned myself to the fact that the contract is expiring and that any permancy is a definite no-no, so the issue has always just been about the issue of a FTA rights to redundancy after a two year period. They are digging their heals in and stating that expiry of the contract, even after two consequetive years without a break in contract, is not a redundancy situation. Looklike the situation is going to have to go to Tribunal.

Oh for goodness sake that would be a ridiculous waste of resources! They are a government department - tell them to look it up on direct.gov! Where the government tell people what their employment rights are!

Ending and renewing your fixed-term contract : Directgov - Employment

If there is no ongoing need for the work then the department can objectively justify the selection of fixed term staff because the contracts were created for a short-term peak in workload - but this is a redundancy and you do acrrue all the other rtights like payments and the right to be considered for suitable alternative employment. This really isn't hard - this pattern of working is commonplace in government departments, and the others seem to get how it works!

I only wish it would be as easy as them looking it up. Ive escalted the issue through to the Civil Service Complex Queries, asking what guidance and laws they are referring to when they state that ' the department does not consider expiry of a FTA as redundancy even after two years service' and they have not commented further on what laws or guidance they are using to make this statement, a too complex a query perhaps ??

I've emailed the Chief Executive and Head of HR about this ongoing issue, but the silence is almost deafening, which just suggests that they are not being up front about the ongoing issue, possibly hoping that the issue is just going to go away or the FTAs are just going to leave without question.

A Tribunal maybe a waste of resources but its the only way I can think of that would get the department to accept that regardless of the Fixed Term Appointment we do have some redundancy rights and would be due some payment after two years continuous employment.

Well , we all had out 3 month end of contract meetings on Friday where it was confirmed that the reason for our contracts not being extended was that they did not expect there to be enough work for us to do ( although we can see that there is loads of work to do and the real reason is to cut the costs).

The Department is still refusing to accept that we are redundant and entiltled to any sort of redundancy pay. I now have 10 days to raise any grievance or appeal against this decision. As far as I can see the reason they are giving for dismissal is fair as the reason does amount to being redundant, but as part of the 10 day period can I raise the issue about not being paid any redundancy pay for use at any Tribunal or does this just relate to the reasons given for dismissal ?

Thanks

Ok. So we are going with the theory that they are stupid? At this stage I would suggest that you go the whole hog - see if that gets their attention. Put in an appeal saying that the redundancy is unfair in law because it is based purely on the non-renewal of a fixed term contract in contravention of the Fixed Term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002; and that they are denying it is a redundancy situation, in which case it is a dismissal and since there is no cause for dismissal it must be an unfair dismissal; and are refusing your statutory right to redundancy pay. That may get the attention of someone who actually knows what they are talking about. Because if you are going to have to go to the trouble of filing an ET1 to get a few weeks worth of redundancy pay, you may as well go the whole hog and claim the lot! I do agree with you that I anticipate that they could objectively justify the redundancy itself - but if you have to go to law over this you may as well make them do so! After all, you have nothing to loose - you can represent yourself and the worst case scenario is that the tribunal award you what you are entitled to! And if they are stupid enough to let it get to the stage of an ET1 when the law on this is so clear, you may as well make it cost them. You never know - maybe the tribunal would agree with the less favoyrable treatement argument and you get a nice bonus - or the employer settles and you still get one!

Stupid and careless in my opinion. They were totally careless when they have extended the contracts beyond two years and I think they are desperately trying to find a loophole somewhere at the moment hence the stock response of ' the department does not consider expiry of a FTA contract as a redundant situation' without givingant guidance on the laws used when making this statement.

I can understand why they are fighting their corner as there is something like 14-15000 FTAs who are in the same position as myself with contracts starting to expiry over the next 6 months.

I've done my homework and found out that the Civil Service Compensation Scheme states that all FTAs who are in a redundant position, are entilted to the same compulsory redundancy rights as a permanent employee, which is 1 months wage for every year worked. So to pay off all the FTAs who are in my position, its going to cost them big bucks when they are continually stating that theres nothing in the budget.

I thank you again SarEl for all your advice

I will be completing and submitting my grievance letter this week but will all my FTA colleagues in the same position have to complete a grievance letter or will one letter from the group as a whole suffice?

You can submit a collective grievance provided everyone signs it individually.