Our whole local office and associated roles are being made redundant. We are under individual employment agreements, all of which stipulate termination notice period, but are silent on entitlements of severence/redundancy pay.
HR policies/procedures currently in place refer to NES requirements for redundancy payments, but that "Transitional provisions may apply to employees who commenced emplyment with XXX in Australia prior to 1 January 2012 - please refer to Human Resources". I presume because the NES came into place in January 2010.
The same HR policy/procedure references a "form" or checklist used by HR and payroll to perform the termination. This form has details of what severence/redundancy pay applies to "individuals hired prior to 1 January 2012" which are higher amounts than the NES.
We are aware of collegues whose roles were made redundant over the last several years who where employed before 2012 and received the higher amounts than the NES. So there is precendent here.
The position now from HR is that these previous higher amounts of severence/redundancy pay were an error and as our employment contract is silent on this, the minimum NES requirements apply.
My view is that our employment contracts is silent on this because there was/is a HR policy/procedure in place (albeit written ambiguously) that this level of detail (a large table) is not warranted in an employement contract. Other parts of the HR policy/procedure such as termination notice refer to employment agreements, but for severence/redundancy pay there is no such reference to your employment contract. There is a precedent also as I have mentioned.
If we/I were to pursue this in court how likely would we be of a judgement in our favour? Is it worth it?