Legal conundrum

[totalnoobie]

Hi

I'm just wondering if anyone knows the answer to this legal question:

After a buy-out by another company, my company has just made the training team redundant; the reason cited was that this was not a profitable arm of the organisation.This means I am now working as a contractor.
I am now working with the organisation to take on any training leads myself.

This arrangement seems to suit most people concerned. However, now the company has decided that, as they have rooms to hire out, they might sell training directly to new clients, hire the rooms out to me and pay me a fixed contractor rate of their choosing. It seems they have realised that training was, in fact, profitable after all and they have shot themselves in the foot.

Referring back to the reason for my redundancy, could it be said that I was unfairly dismissed if they go ahead with their proposal?

Thanks for any advice!

[Peoplesoft bloke]

You need a lawyer who specialises in employment law - which is for permies not contractors.

I would have thought you can only claim the redundancy was bogus if they employ people to do the same work again, rather than be able to claim the reason was a lie, but I really don't know

[malvolio]

If you (or anyone else) is fulfilling the same role as you were in your permie position, then you are not redundant. So you have three choices: either sue them for unfair dismissal, pay back 40% of your redundancy pay to the taxman or keep quiet and hope nobody mentions IR35, since you are utterly caught by it. Which do you suppose is the best course of action?

I should get proper legal advice. You are in a slightly invidious position.

[pmeswani]

Hi

I'm just wondering if anyone knows the answer to this legal question:

After a buy-out by another company, my company has just made the training team redundant; the reason cited was that this was not a profitable arm of the organisation.This means I am now working as a contractor.
I am now working with the organisation to take on any training leads myself.

This arrangement seems to suit most people concerned. However, now the company has decided that, as they have rooms to hire out, they might sell training directly to new clients, hire the rooms out to me and pay me a fixed contractor rate of their choosing. It seems they have realised that training was, in fact, profitable after all and they have shot themselves in the foot.

Referring back to the reason for my redundancy, could it be said that I was unfairly dismissed if they go ahead with their proposal?

Thanks for any advice!

This smells like a sockpuppet.

[totalnoobie]

Cheers

Hi again! Thanks all for the advice. Yeah, I'm hoping to talk to an employment lawyer and CAB in the meantime. What you said was what I was thinking, although you put it more succinctly.
I had to look up what a sock puppet was! I know what you mean, but I didn't realise there was a term for it. Don't worry - you're wrong on that count.
Thanks again.

[RichardCranium]

Referring back to the reason for my redundancy, could it be said that I was unfairly dismissed if they go ahead with their proposal?

Yes.