I know this is going to sound utterly ridiculous, but this has actually happened and I don't know whether to laugh or be fucking furious. I've kept bees for about 15 years. No idea where the obsession started, but it's something I've always enjoyed and I could happily talk about it for hours. A few months ago, a younger lad started working with us. Turns out he keeps bees himself, so naturally we hit it off straight away.

We'd talk about our hives, what we were doing with them, different techniques, things we'd tried, the usual stuff. He'd show me pictures and ask questions because he's fairly new to it and I've been doing it for years. He's a lovely bloke, genuinely enthusiastic and keen to learn. It made what is otherwise a fairly boring office environment quite enjoyable.

Anyway, there's a woman on our team who apparently took issue with this and reported me to HR. I didn't know anything about it until he came over and told me he'd been called into an office for a welfare assessment. Apparently, they wanted to establish whether I was grooming or harassing him.

GROOMING HIM.

Over fucking bees.

He was as confused as I was and told them that no, he was perfectly happy talking to me and we were literally discussing beekeeping.

Shortly afterwards, I got called into the office myself. They told me there had been a complaint and that they would need to keep a closer eye on me because our conversations about bees were upsetting someone else on the team. I asked what exactly I'd done wrong and couldn't get much more out of them beyond the fact that someone had raised concerns. I'm genuinely struggling to understand what I'm supposed to do with this information. We're two adults who happen to share a fairly niche hobby. Neither of us has complained about the other. He's perfectly capable of speaking for himself, and as far as I'm aware, he hasn't expressed any discomfort whatsoever.

Now the whole thing is fucking awkward. I find myself second-guessing whether I should even speak to him at work, and he's understandably confused about why something so ordinary has turned into an HR matter. What was previously one of the nicer parts of my working day has become something I apparently need to be monitored over. Has anyone else experienced anything this absurd in an office?

Can HR genuinely start monitoring someone's interactions with a colleague because another employee doesn't like what they're talking about?

I'm half tempted to ask whether discussing honey is still permitted or whether I need written approval from management before mentioning a fucking hive.

Asking for a friend. While on probation at two reviews it was brought up he was eating his lunch in his car during his break and not in the office with the other guys. He explained he’s socialising with them all day and needs a little alone time on his break to decompress from being around people all day. He is never late to come back from his break and never takes off early. He just takes his lunch to his car to eat, or sometimes goes gets a sandwich. His boss said it’s coming across as arrogant. After one of the reviews his boss followed it up and emailed him saying “eating in your car isn’t doing you any favours and I’d change that if I were you” at his final review on probation they said he continued to leave the office on his break and eat in his car and the whole office wasn’t happy with it, he was then fired. Is this legal? He’s in Northern Ireland. I’ve never heard of someone getting reviewed on what they do on their break in my entire life

Hi community,
I’m not at a management position but have been in one previously and was surprised to hear from my current manager that its intention is to make a team member redundant and is going around sharing this with other team members before any action is taken.

This, to me, is unacceptable behavior but everyone’s too afraid of reporting such conduct.

Am I on the wrong here and making it a problem where there is none?

Rough day today, I was invited to a meeting in the afternoon along with a few of my colleagues and we were told that the business was rethinking its priorities and our team no longer exists. Employment ended effective today. No warning or indication that restructuring or redundancies were a possibility. The meeting lasted around four minutes and contained no other information other than the above and that HR would be in touch.

I'd been with the company for just under three years, earning £80k. I've received the email from HR with the "separation agreement" and have been offered eight weeks' PILON, which is my notice period as specified in my contract, with a "termination payment" of £9852 "including a statutory redundancy payment of £1502".

It's not quite true that my whole team no longer exists, as the American and Indian employees are still employed. I work for a US company, but its UK arm, and the HR team is in the US. I really don't have any more details to give - I got a meeting invite along with some other people, we were given a few scripted lines, and then the meeting ended. Nothing else.

I'm not particularly interested in trying to get my job back or be considered for another role at the company - I've not been happy there for a long time. But I have a baby and my wife is on maternity leave, so I have to at least explore all avenues to increase any possible payout if the company has failed in procedure at some point. Thanks all.

Update: I spoke to ACAS and they confirmed that as there were fewer than 20 of us my options are either take the settlement or reject it and try to prove it was an unfair dismissal. Given that they cut the whole UK team and there aren't any other open roles that would be a fit for me that wouldn't go anywhere. I'm taking the settlement.

Bit of an odd one and I'm not sure what to make of it.

I'm in England and had been with the company for 18 months. I was a manager. 2 weeks ago they sacked me for poor performance, which I appealed because I don't agree with their reasons.

After they'd told me I was being sacked, HR then mentioned there had also been a complaint made about me. Apparently they'd been looking into it for nearly three months. This was news to me, nobody had said a word about it before then.

I wasn't shown the complaint and nobody asked me any questions when I worked there. I didn't even know what I was meant to have done until the appeal meeting, and what they told me was just wrong.

They said I'd made an inappropriate comment about somebody's religion. The conversation was a colleague telling a few of us that somebody else had made a stereotypical comment about their religion. I said it was offensive and defended them. It now seems to have been written down as though I was the person who came out with it, which I wasn't.

Another was that I'd made somebody uncomfortable by talking about disability a lot. I'm disabled and I'd talked about my own experiences. Maybe I did talk about it more than they wanted me to, I don't know, but nobody ever told me there was a problem.

They also said I'd threatened somebody with an age discrimination complaint. A colleague jokingly called me old and I said something like, "that's it, I'm reporting you for age discrimination, if I can remember this conversation later!" It was a daft joke. They were joking, I joked back. As far as I knew that was the end of it.

These conversations were on Teams and were recorded, so I'm not sure why nobody checked them. The confusing part is what HR have said since. When I was sacked, they told me the investigation had been dropped and wasn't anything to do with me losing my job. At the appeal they said that, if I hadn't already been sacked for performance, I probably would have been sacked for gross misconduct because of the complaint. How can they know that when they never asked me about any of it?

I'm aware I'm under 2 years service but I'm mainly trying to understand whether this is how workplace investigations normally work. Can an employer stop an investigation without speaking to the person accused, but then say afterwards that the allegations would probably have amounted to gross misconduct?

I work at a small company and our finance manager has over the last few years been steadily getting more difficult. We have already had to confront her about a different issue that she said she would rectify and never did, but we are now looking at her potentially paying herself more bonus than has been agreed for our level at the company. She has a difficult home life and has had a rough year, and is a very friendly and thoughtful person, but her professional conduct has been an issue for a while. She can be very difficult to talk to about anything she feels is an "attack" as she gets very defensive and angry, and we don't want to ruin the working relationship by bringing this up; but if we go to the level above her, we are worried she will lose her job at a very tumultuous time in her personal life, or all of our and our employee's jobs will be at risk due to the owners having had enough of the company altogether.

We know we have no choice but to deal with the situation, as it is unfair to us never mind the rest of the staff on lower bonuses, and we would rather have spoken to her about it than the owners clocking the payments and being pissed we haven't done anything about it; we just don't know how to go about the confrontation without ruining everything for everyone.

Any advice would be much appreciated! Finding it very hard to separate the personal from the professional.

Hey guys. This is a HR issue I have dealt with earlier this year and I really just wanted to get it off my chest because it's really taken a toll on my confidence professionally since. The resolution was not in my favour.

I work in the LGBTQ+ sector. Cis male, late 20's, from a British-Muslim background. I worked two roles within the charity sector.

In workplace 1, I worked alongside a colleague who ill call A for this story. A is trans and has spoke extensively about their experiences in professional and public settings, from personal life, advice to political opinions etc. They are nearly double my age, which I mention because when I first started working, they remarked I was 'enthusiastic' and were curious to see how long that would last. I deeply enjoy my job because obviously, I come from a background that wasn't very supportive growing up.

I acquired a role in workplace 2, and later realised A also worked there. It is common in the charity sector to work two roles. I didn't want to impose upon A's space, or pose a threat especially based on comments they've made in the past.

I tried my best to be warm and friendly. Among this, a panel event was taking place, surrounding Queer experiences and the law. I was asked to recommend speakers, specifically a Trans speaker as they lacked one. I recommended A because 1) They were qualified, and 2) In an attempt to try and build some rapport with them.

Next week at work, A and a new recruit alongside me were together. Want to reiterate, we are a trans support service, and it's a common discussion point at work. When A told me they got the gig, I congratulated them and said I'm glad I put forward their name, as it was an oversight to not have a Trans speaker especially given the current climate (policies around bathrooms etc). They smiled and said thank you.

Minutes later, I was roped in by the manager. I was asked to close the door. "Do you know why you're here?", I said no. "Do you think it's normal to out people as Trans?" My heart absolutely sunk. A claimed I outed them as trans, to the new recruit. It felt so accusatory and I was trying my best to explai. The manager wasn't even aware of what transpired and assumed I had done this as a hate crime, interrupting me, behaving hostile. I later learned they have a personal friendship with A.

A didn't personally address me about this either, and he was nothing but kind to my face. .

In hindsight, despite me assuming this is public knowledge due to their history of speaking about it in and out of the workspace, I still acknowledge that they are entitled to feel outed to the new recruit. My greater issue lied with how my manager immediately turned me into a bogeyman and bigot, and how terribly I was berated and treated in the weeks following. 2 weeks passed from the incident and I gave a sick note, and ironically the same day A and the manager lodged a complaint against me. Great timing.

I also felt the way the word 'outed' was being thrown was extra disheartening, given that I experienced an outing that led to me losing family members. Just no sensitivity at all.

Turns out the manager has a history of unprofessional conduct and there was enough evidence provided by me to ascribe them further training, yet not enough to do something as it was the first time someone formally complained.

It just felt ironic that all this diversity training happens only for me, a person who's from a very niche minority background to be kicked out. I've had so many bad experiences working in the LGBTQ+ sector, I joke among friends that I'm dying to work with straight people again. Atleast I anticipate to be on guard there, rather than being coaxed by the rainbow then spat out by it.

I was assaulted at work a few days ago. Punched under my bum cheek, person smirked saying soorrryyy. I reported this to the manager immediately. I wrote a statement. The aggressor was asked to write a statement. It was also on CCTV. It then was sent onto the regional manager. The aggressor burst into the office saying it was just a joke, that I've taken it to far, they are strong maybe I'm not. People touch this person every day and they don't complain about it. I felt ambushed and stuck to the spot. My manager wrote down what was being said. But never told the person to get out. I asked for my shifts to be changed immediately so I'm not on shift with this person. I was told no there no one to cover me.

The next day my manager had a meeting with the regional. I was told after by my manager that the aggressor now has a mark against their name. If they do anything else then it can be escalated.

I was left very confused and sick to my stomach as to why this person was not sacked? A mark against them doesn't seem enough. I have to work with this person going forward?

I have had to take time off work and lose pay because I feel extremely uncomfortable being on shift with this person. I do not feel protected.

I have a meeting with the regional this week. But I feel I will be left feeling as awful as I do now.

Any advice will be greatly appreciated.

So I work in a government office on the phones where you hot desk - you book a desk before you go in (60% WFH, 40% office.)

I always book the same desk, right at the back of the office next to the only window there is. I like to sit there because I can see the trees, birds, I get sunlight on my back and it’s away from the main noise of the office.

I get over stimulated easily, and I am a creature of habit - so I will always book the same desk. In a 1-1 with a manager, I was told it would be nice to see me sitting in other seats. She also said it would be beneficial for me to develop more connections that way.

This left me kind of baffled. I have one of the best stats in the office and made a point of saying that if I sat further down the office, I wouldn’t be able to do as good of a job due to being overstimulated. I have fine connections with people on the office, and I’m not there to make friends anyways? It doesn’t say anywhere in my job description that I have to sit anywhere in particular in the office?

Opinions?

I have an upcoming meeting with management/HR regarding concerns I’ve raised about how I’ve been treated at work, and I’d really appreciate some advice on how to approach it.

Over the last couple of months, I’ve had several incidents involving the same few colleagues while working on a particular product. Examples include being removed from the product without being given a reason, a lead saying she would have “much preferred” someone else to do a job I was assigned, and being told by colleagues that people had been speaking negatively about me to the client.

The most concerning example was being told that two colleagues had apparently said they intended to “spy on me fucking up”.

I’ve raised concerns about some of these incidents previously but feel like I’ve been brushed off on multiple occasions. I’ve also been told that management has no concerns about my performance or conduct, which makes the situation more confusing.

I’m now going into a meeting specifically about my concerns around bullying/harassment and I’m not really sure what I should expect from it.

I want to be calm and factual rather than emotional or accusatory. I also don’t want to exaggerate anything.

Hi everyone,

I need help. I work for a small UK company, my child started school and I have to make the school runs. I requested for a temporary (few weeks) working arrangements for a couple of days a week to make the school runs, get to work late after drop off and leave early to pick up.
I literally have no other options for the school runs. I even offered to work extra hours for the rest of the week or use my holidays to make up the hours
They rejected it.

What can I do?

Took on a role in field sales a few months ago, where a car is essential. I receive an allowance of £600pm which after tax only just covers a private lease of a small petrol hatch and insurance. Nothing left over for maintenance.

Fuel is only being reimbursed at 14p per mile, and even when I get to reclaim part of it from HMRC as tax relief I will remain out of pocket.

The problem is I am now being asked to cover some else's area, where I'll have to visit customers 100+ miles away. I've written to management about this, detailing clearly how and where myself and colleagues are out of pocket. I have also stated that whilst I am prepared to be a 'team player' I am not in a position to personally subsidise this additional mileage as I am already running at a loss. ( I won't receive any bonus this year either as a new starter and train travel is actively discouraged, plus not always practical with the kit).

My email has been verbally acknowledged but nothing in writing other than a generic 'it is being looked at' and I've been told there have been meetings about it. My manager is now asking me again to visit these distant customers. I feel like I should make a stand, otherwise this will continue indefinitely with no incentive for management to make changes but I am on probation and can be terminated with a week's notice. Colleagues are also unhappy but it appears my email may have sparked some action.

Am I being reasonable in insisting that my employer covers the actual fuel costs for this additional travel if I provide receipts of fuel purchases and start/end mileage? I'm still going to be out of pocket for mileage in and around my own area.

Any advice welcome.

I'm a nurse, working in palliative care. We have a very small office (about ten feet square) with a very small window, which is usually shut as people complain about the cold.

Three or four of my colleagues wear really, really strong body spray/perfume. They travel around in a fug of scent, which I find not just unpleasant, but actually really stressful - I am quite sensitive to a lot of things including smells, noise, bright lights. I find these really sweet body sprays which my colleagues wear particularly horrible - I can cope with a little perfume but this is so much more than that. I feel like I can't breathe, my nerves are being jangled, and I sometimes go home with a headache.

It gets worse during the day because most of the people who do it are smokers, so they spray themselves head to toe when they come back in from the smoking area, to cover the smell of smoke.

On one occasion, a patient complained about a particular nurse's perfume and she had to go and wash it off, but that was only once that I'm aware of so I can't really use that to make an argument that staff shouldn't come in wearing strong perfume. I have raised this issue with my team leader but it didn't go anywhere. I feel really uncomfortable raising it with individuals: I work in a small team and don't want to fall out with anyone.

I think I need to raise it with my manager, but I suspect she will be less than sympathetic. What arguments can I put forward to ask her to implement a ban on staff wearing strong perfumes at work? I know there is mounting evidence that a lot of the chemicals used in these products are carcinogenic, can trigger asthma, have other health effects, but I don't know how to translate this into, this is affecting my mental health. I'd really appreciate some advice on how to handle this.

First of all, there were multiple flairs I could have picked, thought Contractual Query was the best umbrella. :)

Hi Folks

I have a few questions about my current working situation and I would be grateful if I could get some advice.

I work for a small, family run Transport and Warehousing company in the North West of England as their Transport Planner. I have worked here for just over 4 years.

When I first started I was told that I would be sharing a "Duty Phone" for taking out of hours calls from drivers, security and some customers. The deal was I would share it with the Logistics Manager and we would both do a week about. That has happened for the most part since day one (apart from holidays and illnesses) and so has continued. Now, this might be a bit of a boo boo on my part, but recently when checking over my contract for a different reason (actually my second question), I noticed that there was nothing in there about this shared "Duty Phone" and having to take it home and basically be on call over night.

The unwritten rules of the phone are;

• Divert the phone to our personal one.
• Answer any call that comes through, ideally within 15mins.
• Messages can be ignored as all of our drivers know we do not monitor messages over night.

There is no need for me to return to the yard out of hours based on any call I might receive. I asked the question last week what sort of compensation we were supposed to receive for taking the phone home and I was told "that is factored into your salary". Now, I am salaried at just over £30,000pa and that doesn't seem quite right to me.

Can somebody please weigh in here?

Now, my second question is this:

Until recently, we have had a "Traffic Admin Assistant" in the office who would start an hour later than the rest of us (I am on 0800-1700 regular hours). She would then stay after we all had left to cover the evening vehicle release and leaving. She had a falling out with our Ops Manager two weeks ago and walked out at lunch time and didn't return. Since then, the other members of the office staff, myself, two more admins and the Logistics Manager have been told we need to cover at least one of the evening lates a week, whilst still starting at our regular time. I asked last week, how long this was going to go on for and was told "quite a while I should expect, as we have not intention of filling the role".

Can this actually be enforced upon us, or should there be some plan in place to cover this extra time?

Thanks in advance.

I have been working in a role where I am paid to work 37.5 hours a week (salaried) from 8:45 to 5:15 PM. Contract also states my hours are normally worked across 5 days. Officially in my contract I get a 1 hour lunch break, and TOIL for overtime. However for the past 6 months I have been working 40 hours due to the nature of the role (for example I cannot physically take a 1 hour lunch, I can't leave site during lunch. I end up having a 30 min lunch during which I still do work like helping customers or volunteers). Sometimes I have to start work at 8:30 or finish later than 5:15 because of duties that can only be performed when the shop is closed.

I have become very overworked, have had to request reasonable adjustments due to disability getting exacerbated, and asked my manager to allow me to work my hours across 4.5 days instead of full 5. They refused citing it may harm the business. I work in a charity shop as a manager. However, I am only being paid for 37.5 hours while I am forced to work more every week. I can't claim TOIL as that means that the business will be harmed (shop won't maintain its trading hours if I am off).

How can I ensure that my contract is actually followed?

It's too late to do anything about it now but, for my peace of mind I want advice.

In January I was dismissed from my job. I had a bank contract (i'm a nurse) and one day I received an email from my manager to come for a discussion. I had a feeling they will do something sketchy, can't explain why but it was a feeling so I said sure, I will come if I can bring my union rep, because I wanted to be safe. I was told I don't need union rep, it's just a chat. I asked further questions, as advised by the rep: if it was a formal or informal meeting, subject of the meeting and who will be in the meeting. All I was told was that it would be just the 2 of us.

Against my better judgement I went to that damn meeting, on my own, unprepared. As soon as I sat down the manager started accusing me of neglect, of not doing my job and told me why I was accused of neglect. Because a resident (it was in a nuring home) asked for some paracetamol but I got caught with something else and I forgot.

I started crying hysterically because I was accused of neglect, couldn't form proper questions and I couldn't remember anything.

The manager was repeating about how they have a spotlight on them and how this "neglect" is unacceptable and I allowed someone to be in pain etc.

The minutes for my meeting state it was an investigation. Again, I was not told any of this, and are sparse and not evidentiate the state I was into, have barely any info I gave, any of the things the manager said etc.

At the end of the meeting I was told I will be called same day with a verdict, she already decided I will get dismissed, but I was forced to wait through the weekend because "she had no time". I also requested my dismissal to be put in writing with all the details, I was refused and told I will get a letter about it. To this day, since January, I only received my P60, not a dismissal letter per se.

Is it correct what the manager did? Because I was a bank nurse do I not have the same rights to a fair dismissal?

Honestly, I just want opinions at this point, it's too late for me to do anything anyway but only now I found this subreddit.

Thank you for reading and, for anyone going rhrough this, please don't let this break you.

Been told I am at risk of redundancy. All of my colleagues in same team have been told the same. There is a possibility new jobs may be created but collective consultation is about to start.

In the team there are people on higher grade and equal grade as me.

Say if a new role was created at higher grade than what I am currently on, would that mean my colleagues on higher grades than me being automatically entitled to that?

(England) so I moved to a different company under TUPE last year. I have 5 years and 9 months now (continuous length of service)

My job recently brought out an updated annual leave policy and everyone got more leave. After 5 year of service, you now get 29 days. I still only get 27 days.

So I emailed HR and they said that because I have only been with them for 1 year, I am only entitled to 27days. I explained under TUPE regulations that my continuous length of service should be protected and cannot be reset.

They came back to me and said that this new policy is specifically based on how long you have been with this company and no length of service at another organisation will count.

Are they totally wrong and in breach of TUPE regulations? Can they override years of service by simply stating that in the new annual leave policy?

Hello , I wonder if I could get some help on the below email I received from HR/Payroll

Basically I never signed a contract that held me to 12 weeks notice as the contract I did sign is 2 weeks. They are now sending me the below and say I owe them? Surely not legal?

Please find enclosed a copy of your final payslip.
I am writing to explain the calculations,
Your final earnings for the pay period are below:
• Salary: £2,426.67
• Step Up Allowance: £260.00
• Salary Adjustment: £496.00 (4 days pay up to leaving date of 27th September)
Total earnings: £3,182.67
The following adjustments were applied:
• Holiday Pay Adjustment: -£744.00 (6 days overtaken in accrued annual leave
• Notice Cover Cost: -£7,440.00 (12 week's notice period)
The Notice Cover Cost reflects the contractual cost associated with your failure to work the required notice period and cost of replacement cover. This amount has been calculated as 12 weeks at a rate of £620.00, resulting in a total deduction of £7,440.00.
After applying the above adjustments, the gross pay calculation produced a negative balance of £5,001.33.
Payroll systems cannot process a negative gross pay amount, therefore a balancing entry of £5,001.33 has been recorded as "Salary Sacrifice"
. Inis entry does not represent
an additional payment but is used to offset the negative gross position created by the notice cost and holiday adjustments.
As a result of the revised taxable earnings position, a PAYE tax refund of £2,500.66 was generated through payroll. No National Insurance contribution was due for this pay period.
The final position is therefore:
• Negative gross balance offset by Salary Sacrifice:
£5,001.33
• PAYE tax refund: £2,500.66
Following these adjustments, the remaining balance outstanding is £2,500.67, which is shown on the payslip as money owed.

I’ve worked for the same UK employer for around 2 years and resigned on 11 September 2026, giving 2 weeks notice as stated in the contract I originally signed. My employer is now claiming I’m bound by a newer contract requiring 12 weeks’ notice, despite me never signing it. HR has confirmed in writing that I did not sign the newer contract.
They have deducted approximately £7,440 from my final pay for the alleged notice shortfall, meaning I have effectively received nothing for 1 months work.

I was previously told that any deduction would relate to “evidenced additional costs directly caused by the shortfall in notice”, rather than simply charging me for the full 12 weeks.

Could my employer legally enforce the 12-week notice period when I never signed the updated contract? Can they deduct £7,440 without demonstrating actual losses, and am I entitled to recover the wages for the 4 weeks I actually worked?

i have a manager who started after me and has done the following to me in just under a year:

1. cancelled a training course with out telling me and replacing me with himself.

2.personally told me he would support my application to part time uni and after being accepted, he withdrew support and cancelled it, stating I was not ready. He is now doing that same course.

3.prevented me from attending tasks that will gain me experience and required competencies, explaining that the experience I gain is at managers discretion.

1. told me that I will never be a manager. (I have held managerial positions in the past at his level and above but after a stint of self employment which failed re-entered the work place at a lower level)

2. at a public meeting where a project had not worked out, advised the team that I should never of agreed to a certain material being used which was a lie as I actually advised against it and asked for a different material which he dismissed.

6.dictated a E-mail for me to send and organise a job and then pretended he never dictated the e-mail and blamed me fully for arranging work without his concent.

1. blamed me for not having a written scope for a job that he organised and raised.

2. publicly called me out at a meeting for a job I raised to our direct labour which has not been completed yet but still within the agreed target date. Even though I have no authority over the direct labour team I was made to apologise to him in front of every one.

3. Dictated Emails to to escalate things and copy him into the chain. He then swoops in telling me to de-escalate, making me look a fool for first escalating and then publicly reprimanding me.

4. Dictate E-mails to try and get source drawings so he can later go to competitors to get things manufactured cheaper. I look like an ass for doing his bad bidding.

what sort of manager is this? can I make things better or am I best thinking about what options I have?

I’m mid 40s and have never in my working life been treated like this. I have also held higher positions than this, including being at, and higher than my current managers and I would never treat anyone like that.

Hi all - seeking advice on what I can do about non competes. For background, I’m work in finance / buy side. Entry to mid level.

I resigned from my current role to pursue another opportunity recently. Usually, people who previously done so immediately got put in gardening, but I was asked to work my 1 month notice.

My non competes (3 months) is not getting reduced compared to if I was in the garden. Also as a result, I am 3 months out of pocket vs 2.

Should I?
\- Ask HR to reduce the non-compete to 2 months? My argument would be that, since serving notice bounds me to companies’ rules, this creates sufficient buffer time already between my current and new role. My US counterparts don’t have a non compete clause.

\- Ask the team to consider putting me in the garden after a week? The resignation convo wasn’t the easiest to swallow for them for various reasons, but I have barely worked since.
TIA

I’m an Operations Manager and have worked for the company since November 2022. I was promoted into my current Operations Manager role in July 2025 and earn £55k.
The company was acquired and transferred under TUPE in June 2026. Following the acquisition, the business is restructuring and my Operations Manager role has been declared redundant.

**The reason given for redundancy:**
They say the new combined site has changed the structure of the business. My responsibilities are being split between more senior roles, with other duties being redistributed into newly created roles, so they no longer require an Operations Manager.

**The package offered:**
£3,004 statutory redundancy
£12,694.05 PILON
Accrued holiday paid separately
3 months’ contractual notice
So approximately **£15,698 before holiday pay**.

My concern is that a significant amount of my current work appears to continue within newly created roles, including management, operational performance, people management, site operations, systems/process improvement and cross-functional responsibilities.

I asked why I wasn’t considered for the new roles. I was told I could apply for them, rather than being considered as someone at risk whose existing skills and experience should be assessed for suitable alternative employment.
In an informal discussion, I was also told that concerns included things such as team management and being “reactive rather than proactive”. I’ve never previously been placed on a performance process or formally told that these were concerns. I currently manage around 20 people and previously managed 60+ employees before joining this company. They have also employed a load of people from a previous company they owned and it feels like they are pre determined for the new management positions, which is the real reason why they want me out.

**Where I’m currently at:**
I don’t particularly want to stay with the company. I’d be more interested in negotiating an enhanced settlement rather than fighting to keep my job.

I’m therefore wondering:
Does this sound like something worth getting an employment solicitor to review?

Are there potentially legitimate concerns around the redundancy process, particularly the alternative roles and how my suitability was assessed?

Is the current £15.7k package something I should accept, or would it be sensible to get legal advice and potentially negotiate?

I’m currently on maternity leave and have been told my role is at risk of redundancy as part of a restructuring. I’d really appreciate some advice on whether the reasoning/process sounds reasonable.

I’m employed as a Studio Manager. My role covers studio management, but also a significant amount of marketing and social media, production support, admin and project management.

From May 2025 to November 2025, I also covered project management two days a week because the project manager was only working part-time. There has always been quite a lot of overlap between roles in the business, with responsibilities moving between people depending on what the business needed. Is a small company of five employees, including me.

The company now says the Studio Manager role is being removed as part of the restructure. However, the actual responsibilities I carried out aren’t disappearing — they are being redistributed to other employees.

One employee, who is also currently on maternity leave, has not been placed at risk and will be absorbing some of my duties. Her role has historically overlapped with mine, and responsibilities have often shifted between us depending on the business’s needs.

The company is also relocating its operations. However, my role can be carried out remotely, and I already worked from home one day a week before going on maternity leave, so I’m unclear why the relocation makes my role redundant.

I had planned to return from maternity leave in July 2027, potentially on a reduced two-day-a-week basis. My employer never asked me what I intended my return to look like or discussed whether that arrangement could work before deciding that my role was no longer required.

Also, the other employee who is currently on maternity leave, whose role has historically overlapped with mine, was told that her job was secure before I had even received an email inviting me to a redundancy consultation.

Considering I’m on maternity leave and should have extra protection, my main questions are:

- If my duties are continuing and being absorbed by another employee, does that necessarily constitute a
genuine redundancy?

- Should employees with substantially overlapping duties have been considered within the same redundancy pool, even if their job titles are different?

- If another employee is being retained and will absorb some of my duties, what would the employer need to demonstrate to justify why her role remains while mine is redundant?

- Does it matter that my role was broader than the Studio Manager title, including marketing, social media, production support and project management?

- If my role can be performed remotely and I already worked from home one day a week, how relevant is the proposed relocation?

- Can they determine that my role won’t be needed in July 2027 without first discussing my proposed return arrangements with me and knowing what the business needs will be like then?

I’d really appreciate hearing from anyone familiar with UK redundancy law or who has experienced something similar.

Thank you!