They know it alright, they just like trying their luck. Going to an employment tribunal takes time and resources: understandably many would rather just treat it as water under the bridge.
I would have been interested to hear a tiny bit more from Daniel why this is unfair dismissal. Let’s say she does 25 hours and they need someone to do 35 hours but think they’ll struggle to find someone willing to just do 10 (the difference)… Is the point that she should be offered redundancy instead?
I don't really understand why it's unfair in law. I thought organisations regularly did this 'fire and rehire' business? My own employer has done this to us twice now: accept the new employment contract or termination.
![I was sacked after my kids used my work laptop. Is that fair? [LBC Legal Hour]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/B2MYtte4vGM/mqdefault.jpg)
![I was sacked after my kids used my work laptop. Is that fair? [LBC Legal Hour]](/img/tr.png)
![I was sacked for blowing the whistle at work. What do I need to prove? [LBC Legal Hour]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rdBXNI3_TNU/mqdefault.jpg)
![I lent a friend £65,000 who then died. How can I get my money back? [LBC Legal Hour]](/img/1.gif)
I am constantly amazed that HR managers either dont know the law or think they can ignore it.
They know it alright, they just like trying their luck. Going to an employment tribunal takes time and resources: understandably many would rather just treat it as water under the bridge.
“You’re” fired! Dear me that title is sloppy.
It’s a deliberate ploy to get pedants to comment and boost the RUclips ranking 😂
100% let them sack you and claim for unfair dismissal. Especially if you have reason to not work full time. Likely win.
I would have been interested to hear a tiny bit more from Daniel why this is unfair dismissal. Let’s say she does 25 hours and they need someone to do 35 hours but think they’ll struggle to find someone willing to just do 10 (the difference)…
Is the point that she should be offered redundancy instead?
It would be difficult to argue there's a case for redundancy as the job is not disappearing or diminishing, but increasing.
But they have breached a contract.
@@chriswinter6672the job is disappearing. The new job has very different hours.
You're*
Why is it veryone so vague about the racts? Do you have it in writing.. yeah maybe maybe not.
I don't really understand why it's unfair in law. I thought organisations regularly did this 'fire and rehire' business? My own employer has done this to us twice now: accept the new employment contract or termination.
And this is a local authority not some ill-advised small firm.
They still have to pay redundancy and any other payments required. So basically they pay all that the employees would be awarded by a tribunal.
Why would you want to carry on working somewhere that clearly doesn’t want you any more? And she wants to leave anyway.
Money?
Survival?
The employer wants to change the status quo whilst the employee wants to maintain it. All is open to negotiation at this point.