Is my new role a suitable alternative given it includes much more travel?

The main difference between a suitable alternative and (non-suitable) alternative role is that unreasonably refusing a suitable alternative role means that you may be made treated as dismissed without being paid a statutory redundancy payment.

Whether a job is suitable or not is subject to the following:

• the terms of the proposed role being offered;
• the similarity of the work to your existing role;
• your skills, competencies and circumstances in relation to the proposed role; and
• the salary (including benefits), status, location and hours.

If your employer wrongly treats a job offer as a suitable alternative and refuses to pay you redundancy pay as a result, you can lodge a claim for a statutory and/or enhanced redundancy pay and unfair dismissal.

If it is reasonable for you to refuse what your employer is suggesting is a ‘suitable’ alternative role (i.e. one with increased overseas travel), you will still be entitled to a statutory redundancy payment.

Whether or not it is reasonable for you to turn down the alternative roles depends on your specific circumstances including:

• whether the role is permanent or temporary – from the information provided they are both full-time roles;
• the way in which the offer is made to you – has your employer given you sufficient time consider it; and
• your personal circumstances – the impact it would have on your travelling and / or family commitments.

The third bullet point is most pertinent to your circumstances in relation to the additional childcare that you would require in light of the increased proposed travel requirements.

• Vote  
• 0
• 0
• You already voted!

• Tags:
• Redundancy