Redundancy selection process

[Robert35]

Hi guys,

Newbie to the forum so please be gentle! :>) I'm seeking advice from various sources on this but wondered if anyone here can help please.

We are going through a restructuring exercise at work. Shortly prior to management revealing the new structure, our team was asked to form a smaller “sub-group” within our team that would focus solely on one of our team’s key priorities. This was carried out on the basis of some staff within the team being appointed to this smaller group by the manager – no transparent selection process at all and we were told who would be in the team and who woulnd’t be in a series of individual meetings with the manager after the event. The rest of the team is to deal with other, non priority work.All members of the team are qualified and capable of doing the work which is being allocated to the smaller group.

The proposed restructure is then announced which proposes large cuts in the number of staff in our team with the aim of meeting the core work priorities only ie the work of the smaller group. My argument would be that in the event of applying for each other’s jobs in the redundancy selection process, team members who have not been appointed to be in the smaller group are prejudiced against by the fact that certain officers are already within the smaller group already informally established – surely it can no longer be a level playing field when it comes to the recruitment process?

Please can someone advise on my rights in this situation? Many thanks in advance.

[ULA]

What should happen is that once a redundancy situation has been established a "redundancy pool" needs to be identified of staff who are affected. If suitable alternative jobs are identified then staff should be notified of them and encouraged to apply. Assuming there is more than one applicant for a position then to ensure a fair process the interviewer/s should have a clearly defined set of objective criteria against which to assess every candidate regardless of whether they have been involved in the smaller group.

[Robert35]

Thank you for your reply. Yes, they have now provided the pooling arrangements with grades of posts. As you say, it should be a totally fair and unbiased process but my argument is that it cannot be fair and unibiased as by establishing this smaller group already the process is fundamentally flawed and prejudiced as there is an advantage to those staff who have been appointed members of this smaller group and are therefore already incumbent in those posts. I can’t see how that can be fair.

[ULA]

I am not sure how many employees are to be affected by the possibility but if it is more than 20 then consultation should be taking place with a representative, either a union rep or employee elected rep. In which case I would ask them to ask the company how they are going to carry out an objective interview for the positions whereby people who may have been part of the smaller group might be perceived to have an advantage.

If there are less than 20 employees affected then i suggest you arrange to speak with the relevant member of management dealing with the process and ask them the same question.