Driven by rising costs, ongoing global uncertainty and the ever-present spectre of artificial intelligence, there has been a significant number of job cuts this year already.

According to independent analysis, 4450 tech workers in Australia lost their jobs in the first three months of this year, with nearly all of these blamed on artificial intelligence.

Legal experts say organisations often make mistakes when carrying out layoffs, and workers should be aware of them.

When it comes to redundancies, LegalVision senior lawyer Emma Buscholtz said she too often sees companies rush this process and make mistakes that may come back to bite them.

“Some companies essentially rush these processes before adequately planning for it, and before thinking ahead of associated costs with redundancy decisions, planning and proper consultation, and potential redeployment opportunities in a business as well,” Buscholtz said.

“Take a breath, think about it, and think of the risk and liabilities, and seek professional advice.”

Don’t rush it

A redundancy is genuine under Australian law if the employer no longer needs someone’s job to be done by anyone due to changes in its operational requirements, and they have complied with all relevant consultation requirements.

If these requirements aren’t followed, a worker may be able to access compensation or get their job back.

This was seen in a recent Fair Work Commission decision in April, involving a woman who was made redundant at a beauty company.

The redundancy was ruled to be not genuine because it was not due to operational changes, and the company did not properly consult with her or consider redeploying her in a different role.

The employee was told she was being made redundant in an email that claimed this was due to her role becoming obsolete.

In response to the employee raising concerns with this process, her employer responded with concerns about her attendance at work and conduct.

The Fair Work Commission found this was “somewhat suspicious”.

“This suggests that the real reason that position was made redundant is not because of any change in operational requirements,” the findings said.

The woman was awarded compensation of nearly $10,000, plus superannuation, by the Fair Work Commission.

Not ticking every box

In another case, the Fair Work Commission found that while every other element of a genuine redundancy had been fulfilled, because a logistics company did not properly consult with an employee on their potential redeployment, they were unfairly dismissed.

The Commission found that the company did not raise the 18 vacant jobs it had listed at the time with the employee they were making redundant, and instead placed the onus on her to do this work.

But it is their responsibility to inform the employee of efforts they’ve made to investigate a redeployment, and discuss these with them, the Commission found.

The ruling found the company did not take these steps, and that made the redundancy not genuine.

The woman was awarded compensation of more than $7000, plus superannuation.

How you’ll be picked for a redundancy

Australian workers should also be wary of how they are selected for redundancies among others in similar roles, and whether this process is in line with the rules.

“It’s important businesses are selecting employees for redundancy in a fair and objective way,” Buscholtz said.

“It’s often in the consultation phase when they get it wrong, and in assessing reasonable redeployment opportunities.

“Some employers are using redundancy as a guise to move on underperforming employees in the business.

“That employee isn’t working out so employers try to manufacture redundancy to move them on – that’s highly problematic and risky.

“If you can’t tick off the criteria, you have exposure to the economic loss claim.”

Companies must run an “objective redundancy selection process” to meet their requirements, Buscholtz said.

“Looking at a group performing the same role, you’re actually selecting who will be picked based on purely objective criteria, with a matrix or Excel spreadsheet, and filling and marking individual employees against set criteria, such as remuneration, when they were employed and performance considerations, but you must be careful with that.”

Many of the biggest tech firms in the world have made significant job cuts this year, while making huge investments in artificial intelligence.

Meta has laid off 10 per cent of its staff, or about 8,000 workers, while Block shed nearly half of its workforce with 4,000 job cuts.

Tech firms have also run into trouble when making employees redundant.

Earlier this year, a senior Google employee in the United Kingdom claimed she was made redundant in retaliation for reporting inappropriate behaviour by her manager, and launched an unfair dismissal claim.