One problem is the cost of delay/compliance with the insurer’s requirements. These requirements can go way beyond the requirements of employment law.
For example, recently we worked with a business whose insurers had required six weeks consultation for a small-scale (less than 20) redundancy exercise. The business had barely managed to cover payroll during an earlier extended period of consultation (as required by their insurers) and when a further redundancy exercise was needed a few months later, they came to us for advice on how to implement a redundancy exercise in a more timely fashion.
This time, rather than our client asking the insurers ‘advice line’ what should I do, and simply carrying out everything on the list, we put together a proposed plan with timescales, method of selection, processes etc. The question this time was “if we do this will be still be on cover”.
The answer was, of course, yes. This time the consultation process was completed within a fortnight. Our client is still within the terms of their cover AND they have done what their business needed within an acceptable timescale for them.
The amount they spent on our advice was covered more than five fold by the money they saved from an extended consultation period and they even managed to put some of the saving towards ex gratia payments for the outgoing staff.
Sometimes success is not in ‘great victories’ but in navigating the spaces in between.
Click these links for other blogs on redundancy :
and link to this web page on Irenicon – http://www.irenicon.co.uk/Consultancy/redundancyforemployers.html
Annabel Kaye is Managing Director of Irenicon Ltd, a specialist employment law consultancy.
Tel: 08452 303050 Fax: 08452 303060
Website : www.irenicon.co.uk.
You can follow Annabel on twitter – http://twitter.com/AnnabelKaye