Letting people go
These regulations set out rules and procedures around letting people go, from notice of termination to redundancy payments.
You can find the regulations that relate to letting people go below to the left.
|
Collective Redundancies (Amendment) Regulations 2006
This regulation implements a European Court of Justice judgement to clarify the steps an employer must take before issuing dismissal notices in large-scale redundancies
Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
|
Collective Redundancies and Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (Amendment) Regulations 1995
The Regulations require the employer to consult either elected representatives of the employees or representatives of a recognised trade union where there are to be redundancies or a transfer of an undertaking. They also limit the requirement to consult about redundancies to cases where at least 20 redundancies are proposed. The Regulations also provide protection for elected representatives against dismissal and against being subjected to any other detriment and confer on them a right to time off with pay to carry out their functions.
Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
|
Redundancy Payments (Exemption) (No 1) Order 1969,
Schemes authorised by the Secretary of State for Employment under Section 157 Employment Rights Act 1996. These schemes are a substitute for the statutory payments under the Employment Rights Act 1996 and are at least as high as them.
Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
|
Redundancy Payments (Exemption) (No 1) Order 1970,
Schemes authorised by the Secretary of State for Employment under Section 157 Employment Rights Act 1996. These schemes are a substitute for the statutory payments under the Employment Rights Act 1996 and are at least as high as them.
Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
|
Redundancy Payments (Exemption) Order 1980
This order exempts employees of certain governing bodies of Lancashire County Council from a statutory redundancy scheme.
Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
|
Redundancy Payments Office Holders Regulations 1965,
These Regulations apply, with the necessary modifications, the Redundancy Payments Act 1965 to the office holders specified therein.
Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
|
Redundancy Payments Termination of Employment Regulations 1965,
These Regulations apply, with the necessary modifications, the Redundancy Payments Act 1965 to a chief constable or a chief or assistant chief officer of a fire brigade who becomes redundant as a result of an amalgamation of police forces or combination of fire brigades.
Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
|
Unfair Dismissal and Statement of Reasons for Dismissal (Variation of Qualifying Period) Order 1999,
This order lowered the qualifying period of continuous employment needed to acquire the right not to be unfairly dismissed from two years to one year. It also lowered the qualifying period of continuous employment needed for the entitlement , on request, to a written statement of reasons for dismissal from two years to one year and the relevant transitional arrangements for both.
Read More… (opens in a new window)
|
Tell us what you think should happen to these regulations and why, being specific where possible:
- Should we scrap them altogether?
- Could their purpose be achieved in a non-regulatory way (eg through a voluntary code?) How?
- Could they be reformed, simplified or merged? How?
- Can we reduce their bureaucracy through better implementation? How?
- Can we make their enforcement less burdensome? How?
- Should they be left as they are?
Leave a Reply
On an issue directly related to redundancy etc, I note the Unemployment Benefits have been Taxable since the 1980′s – this seems unfair to tax someone who was made redundant through no fault of his/her own. Taxing Unemployment Benefit is also very expensive to administer, as the question to ask is, why is the state spending a Tenner in Collecting a Pound off an umemployed persion in receipt of benefit, and operating at a Loss of Nine Pounds for every pound collected (if at all)??? – Does not seem to make sense from my end. Remember this includes the costs incurred in running and maintaining an appeals service network across the UK, including Office Costs and administrative costs, which tend to escalate during economic recessions.Comment Tags: Redundancy, Tax, Unemployment Benefit