Yes, the truth is somewhere, but I'm not sure where. I meet with M and make a suggestion as to how I could keep my job. I do this because I am playing the game not because I really do want to keep it.
M had told me that the reason we were having another meeting was because I (yes, my fault again) said I wasn't going to fight the redundancy. There is supposed to be a discussion and consultation period and I had just negated that by my initial reaction. But we know from my previous post that the outcome has already been decided. So although it appears to be a waste of time, I am still receiving a salary.
However in this discussion with M, I provided her with two pieces of information she was not aware of. I know who her legal advisers are and they are crap. That the cooling off period for redundancy is 6 months not 3 months. That the redundancy pay can be capped at £330 per week.
If it is 6 months, then I would like my pay to reflect my previous full-time salary. If it isn't I will accept my part-time salary as long as it is not capped. If it is capped - and there is a £1500 difference between the two, I will consider a tribunal.
Interestingly instead of giving them a way of paying me less, by telling them about the salary being capped, I have also given them an opportunity to be greedy and try to pay me less because to quote D 'she would not be expecting more'.
Why would he think that?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment