HRM and Employment Law: Analyzing the VULPUS! Agency Redundancy Case

This case study examines the legal and human resource management (HRM) aspects of Karl's redundancy at VULPUS! advertising agency. Karl, a team leader with a long-term back condition, was informed of potential redundancy due to reduced revenues. The analysis addresses whether Karl has grounds to claim unfair dismissal at an employment tribunal, considering factors like his length of service, performance record, and the circumstances surrounding his redundancy. It further assesses the accuracy of Harold's (Creative Director) assessment of Karl's redundancy payment entitlement and identifies other potential issues with VULPUS!'s handling of the redundancy, highlighting wider implications for HR practices within the company, including the importance of following legal guidelines and ethical considerations in redundancy processes.

HRM law case analysis

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................3
TASK ..............................................................................................................................................3
Legal claim to an employment tribunal? What claim might he make? What other information
might we need to decide whether Karl has a claim?...................................................................3
Is Harold likely to be correct regarding his assessment of Karl’s entitlement to a redundancy
payment? Why?...........................................................................................................................4
Are there any other issues with how VULPUS! have handled the redundancy? If so, what are
these and what are the wider implications for how HR is conducted within the company?.......4
CONCLUSION ...............................................................................................................................5
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................6

INTRODUCTION
Employment is an important concept in which all the person who are being involved in
working are called as employees and the employers. This is mainly the work which is being
framed by the individuals in order to manage the growth and the profit and also to rein-curse the
adaptability through which the organisational progress can be managed. In UK there is
employment tribunal which provides all the necessary areas for the protection of the rights of the
Work force. This manage all the basic areas which comprise of salary issue, unfair dismissal,
redundancy, rights of the employees and many more. In this report there is given a case scenario
of Karl who was being working under the VULPUS and was told to change the position due to
the longer illness and the incapacity to be present and he was informed to take the redundancy
payment (Farafontova, and et. al., 2021). This report will cover legal claim for the employment
tribunal in which the essential concepts of redundancy along with the employers duties for
payment are being asked.
TASK
Legal claim to an employment tribunal? What claim might he make? What other information
might we need to decide whether Karl has a claim?
Redundancy is mainly the concept in which employer in the organization reduce the
workforce and this is being made due to certain issues which can be like any of the business
closure, lay off, loss in the current situation. This is mainly the auxiliary factors as this is not any
kind of reflection in the employees ability. In Employment right act 1996 section 139 provides
that any of the employees who are being dismissed so as to carry on the general business and in
an intention to cease so the employers intends to remove or cease all the employees who are
being employed by them. This is being made so as to manage the requirements for general and
particular kind and also to manage the employed areas by the employer (Gousev, and Yurevich,
2021).
Karl in order to protect himself from the removal or the redundancy can take the claim of
statutory redundancy pay as in this all the employees who are being working in the organization
for 2 years and more are being undertaken and will have certain implications which are like:
 Their will be implied that all the employees will get half week pay for whole full year

 one week payment will be given for full year in case the age is 22 or more but not more
then 41.
 and the payment will be given one and half week for full year to the employees who
were being 41 year or older.
Thus, their can be applied that all the payments as in relation to the employment should
be given to Karl as their implicate that Karl was being working over their since 4 years and he
has the right to get the payment for the work which was being made by him as theses are his
statutory rights (Mazaroff, and Horn, 2021).
Is Harold likely to be correct regarding his assessment of Karl’s entitlement to a redundancy
payment? Why?
Redundancy as is generally a major type of dismissal in which there is no requirement of
any of the role in the company and some of the main element are like the closing of the
company, pr there is any changing of the roles in the organization for the certain work and also
in case when the company is changing location. All the employer have the right that they can
actually remove any of the employed in case when there is implied that all the legal issues and
the management are being addressed. Harold as in order to manage the loss and the generate the
revenue can take the help of redundancy so as to manage the growth and also to apply the
framing and the work growth and balance (Kiersztyn, 2021). Their is been given that but he
cannot at all such instance can make the employees to be forced to take any of the decisions
according to their own sake. Which means that all the employees have the right to get the
payment on timely basis and their should not be any alternation which can be applied in all the
areas for the redundancy. As in Packman Lucas Associates v Fauchon, court held that all the
reduction of the employees from the job can not only be made for the fixed terms on which the
there is given that all such employee who are being sick on leave due to medical conditions
cannot be removed or be the part of redundancy. As this will not be amounted to redundancy in
ERA 1996.
Are there any other issues with how VULPUS! have handled the redundancy? If so, what are
these and what are the wider implications for how HR is conducted within the company?
The VULPUS as being the known company can eventually manage the redundancy by
considering the steps in which they should prepare the reasons and the ways in which the issues
which the company is being facing. The there is required to gave the selection for the employees

and the issues that the company is aligning. Later on there is being needed to manage the
individual consultation in which all the methods and the working are being applied accordingly.
Further all the employees who are being selected for the redundancy are needed to get the notice
which is required ti be served on proper and timely manner. Finally the termination is needed to
be given according to the ways and also with the payment which is being made.
CONCLUSION
From this above report it is concluded that employee law is an act which helps in
protecting the rights of the employees in the company and also give them statutory obligation in
which they can manage the performance. Redundancy is all such situation in which the
employees are being removed from the company in order to manage their lay off and cost
cutting. Further it is also concluded that no employees are being removed from the organisation
in case of their health issues and also for any of the health and other reasons.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Mazaroff, S. and Horn, T., 2021. Maryland Employment Law. LexisNexis.
Farafontova, E.L., and et. al., 2021. Legal Problems Of Human Resource Management In The
Employment In Russia.
Gousev, A.B. and Yurevich, M.A., 2021. Globalization of Employment Amid COVID-19
Pandemic. MGIMO Review of International Relations, 14(1), pp.148-173.
Kiersztyn, A., 2021. Who moves from fixed-term to open-ended contracts? Youth employment
transitions in a segmented labour market. Acta Sociologica, 64(2), pp.198-214.