clutching at straws?

A question about : clutching at straws?

hey all, here to pick brains

work planning to make 17 (UK) people redundant plus 8 (USA)

one company, one legal entity

because

Q1: as the total is >20 as one legal entity, should the process have been triggered as per EAT: USDAW V Woolworths?

Q2: can anyone confirm the validity of ...
it is the number of employees who will be at risk. So if an employer is putting 30 people at risk, but 20 of them will be given jobs, the collective consultation provisions are still required.?

17 jobs to be lost but 50+ people pooled and on notice

any feedback would be most welcome!

have come across the following on different solictors/employment lawers site

Best answers:

• Q1 - If the workers in the United States are not under UK legal jurisdiction - i.e. do not have UK employment rights - then they are not counted.
  Q2 - If you ever need a lawyer, get a better one than this lot. They are wrong - what the law says is 20 or more redundancies in a ninety day period. The definition of a redundancy is the loss of a post. People are not made redundant - positions are.
• Thanks, that's what I like to see, straight forward no-nonsense answers.
  Thought as much to both questions but nothing to loose in asking, cheers