Redundancy Process at Major UK Index Provider – Flawed and Unfair?

I wanted to share my experience with a recent redundancy process at a large financial services company in London, UK.

Earlier this year, the company announced a restructuring, merging two client-facing teams into a new function. Staff were told redundancies would happen through a selection process. Initially, I was informed that the selection would be between a small group of peers in my senior grade.

Midway through the process, the company expanded the redundancy pool, without any formal communication, to include junior staff from a different team. Despite having a stronger performance rating and longer tenure, myself and other senior colleagues were scored lower than juniors. At the end, two junior employees were "promoted" into the newly created role, while more experienced staff were exited and replaced.

Several serious issues occurred:

Selection criteria appeared inconsistent with our performance histories.

Questions about process transparency (e.g., why certain employees were excluded) were not answered in writing, despite repeated formal requests.

Settlement terms changed after concerns were raised — initially, enhanced redundancy was offered without conditions, but suddenly, a settlement agreement was required.

There are concerns of predetermination and possibly indirect discrimination, given who was selected versus exited.

Posting this so others know:
Always document everything, ask questions in writing, and seek legal advice early if you spot procedural red flags. Companies don’t always follow their processes as carefully as they claim.

Comment! It's anonymous!

14 replies (most recent on top)

Another post deleted today/yesterday, and one visible again after being deleted? Why would you delete a post and then re-enable it? AI deleting/re-enabling posts?

Anyway, more layoffs coming this month and next. Other companies are still shedding, but more heavily now, and predictions of a heavy stock market correction next year mean more layoffs will come. Probably best to find a side hustle and cut your spending.

While age shouldn't be a factor in deciding who to let go, the older you are the more likely you are to be on a higher wage, so you will find that the urge to replace experienced and skilled staff (i.e. expensive) with younger and cheaper staff is always going to be there I'm afraid. This doesn't negate how OP was treated by a leading index provider, and kudos for giving some advice based on their poor experience.

Hope the OP managed to find a new role.

Again, another post removed regarding the underlying reason for these audits. That removal would confirm that the content of the removed post is factual.

An earlier post, by a manager, was also removed so with both removals the content of these posts would point to some of the concerns behind the audits. Rather unsettling given this is a major index (and benchmark) provider and let's be realistic not surprising given the way they execute employment law regarding layoffs/redundancies as per the OP and the wider LSEG group postings on this wider forum.

For anyone thinking of joining LSEG it's probably best to look elsewhere. I certainly wouldn't want to work under the leadership at this place and the deleted posts tell us that someone else is looking into how they work which is not good and quite frankly shocking.

@nrb the calendar meetings for these audits were titled 'Skill Person Reviews'. That's all I personally know.

Are these 'audits' why there have been a lot of redundancies? What's behind these audits?

@cbg Those 'audits' are not audits. They are a form of external control.

Those "constant, alarming and off the scale audits" most be expensive.

@bhf not surprised... probably more to come in Q3 Q4

Some senior tech roles in FTSE R. have just been made redundant in London.

@9qj+1jsqdah41 They also eliminated the previous post. I wonder why? :)

They eliminated several experienced staff members and outsourced the roles to Bangalore.

FTSE Russell has been very busy for last 6 months posting new roles for managing compliance and regulatory related issues.

Now, you have to think why is that exactly and why are HR asking people being made redundant not to socialise the redundancy with their colleagues? Why are managers sending out fairwell emails stating that 'Joe Bloggs' has found new opportunities when they have been let off?

If a company is purposely not following employment law, according to the experiences mentioned in this thread, then what other laws and regulations are they refusing to follow?

@da+1jsqdah41 : I'll assume you mean FTSE Russell. And yes, the whole process was shady to say the least. So yes, both flawed and unfair. But think of it another way -> it's a brain drain. And they have secret costs to account for so they'll look for a cheaper replacement to help pay for this. But, what I noticed was that at least a month before I was given notice I was being excluded from certain meetings and certain people, like my line manager, were keeping me out of the loop of key information for my role. I was not the only one experiencing this that was then made redundant.

If you have any other concerns not related to redundancy then the FCA have a whistleblowing form on their website you can use to share any concerns that are of public interest about this company or LSEG in general.

Anyway, it's a dire company if you mean FTSE Russell. If not, well we'll leave it at that and good luck finding your next role.

@d0+1jsqdah41 you do know LSEG has an index business? there is more to the company than workspace.

Another PR agency initiated post on behalf of LSEG to try to distract from posts highlighting the human disaster that is Head of Workspace platform.

Thread regarding Refinitiv layoffs

Redundancy Process at Major UK Index Provider – Flawed and Unfair?

14 replies (most recent on top)

Post a reply