Interesting case.... redundancy or redeployment?

[ER-Enthusiast]

I have an interesting case before me at the present, if you would care to share your thoughts that would be great.


I have an employer who has made a person redundant and consequently paid them out. A few months after this the employee was re employed with the company (completely different sector and role) and so there is not some argument over this being a re-deployment and continuation of service rather than a redundancy.

One sector of the organisation is now asking the other sector to pay up for the employees balance of sick leave and long service leave.

My first thoughts are that there is no continuation, its a new employment relationship. However there is also a notion that it could be possibly considered as a continuation of employment by fair work and so the severance pay really doesn't count for anything, similar to if a business changed ownership and existing employees entitlements were "paid out" doesn't stop them for claiming those entitlements as you cannot pay out such entitlements so it ends up being more a bonus payment then any entitlement pay out.

Hoping my message is coming across here

[Qld IR Consultant]

Well it certainly doesn't come into play for Transmission of Business. Nor in my opinion would it be continuation. If the employee was made redundant, got paid out, then months later applied and went through the recruitment process and was successful in obtaining employment in another section of the business then bad luck.

If the other section of the business was silly enough to say "yeah we'll give it back to you and get it from the other section" then i'd say they should have got some better advice before committing to it.

[FWI]

It doesnt come into play for transmission of business, but for a very good reason, because the entitlements transfer.

However, correct, the entitlements ceased when service ceased, however, as long as it was a genuine redundacy and the employee was re-engaged after three months and the new business has nothing to do with the old, then all good, other wise grey area and even though transmission has not occured by way of sale, the new tranfer of business matter of the FWAct no longer require a physical sale. So bear that in mind.

[ER-Enthusiast]

Thanks for your responses,

it is less than three months, I have just reviewed the dates...