Im i entitled to redundancy pay?

my company is relocating and i've only been there for a year, ive been sent a package that says i will be entitled to 25% of my annual pay. also a girl who has only been there for 6 months is also gettin this package. but ive lookied on the net and it says u have to work a minumum of 2 yrs to be entitled to redundancy pay. i questioned the manager and she said they are offering so much because then people will leave and then they will have to train completley new people for a few months till they close and they cant waste their time doing that. im i being taken for a ride and hanging around for nothing?

Sorry, you're getting more than the law entitles you to, and you are asking if you are being taken for a ride? Basically, you will get 3 months salary when the firm closes, plus the salary you will get paid up until the firm closes. So, you can take 3 months after the firm closes to find another job, and you will be as well off as you are now.

I'd say they were being very generous, and I'd stick with it!

It sounds like they are offering you a very good deal. Three month's pay for a redundancy settlement after only a year is well above the norm.

Simple answer- no- you have to have worked at your company for at least 2 years before you are entitled to redundancy pay.

What you have read on the net is right. You LEGALLY have to be working for a company for solid 2 years before you get anything. Look for another job FAST, unless you want to relocate with the company.

Just to clarify what others have said... Legally you have to have worked there for a length of time before you are ENTITLED to anything. This does not mean that the company can't choose to offer you something. Also, legally, the usual requirement is to give you 1 WEEKS pay for every YEAR you have worked. 3 months salary after just a year is an excellent offer.

However, what you have said doesn't really make much sense. The firm is offering a high amount so that employees will leave the firm. The firm will then need to train new people for a few months till they close "and they cant waste their time doing that". I don't understand that bit. Why not just keep on the people who are taking redundancy until the firm relocates? Also, is the firm simply relocating? If so, why are they trying to get rid of staff?

There is nothing to say that you can't accept the offer, start looking for another job and work until the firm closes.