Unfair Redundancy or NOT?

[gobezza]

Hi, I was seconded into a position within a major company which became permanent in Sept this year. The job role changed slightly but it was permanent.

In Oct I was put At Risk from Redundancy as my new role didn't exist in the new structure.

I challenged this, with guidance from my manager and one of the company directors, in my first 121 and my role was introduced to the new structure under a different name and slightly higher grading.

Someone else has been offered this job and I'm being made redundant.

Is this right?

[bluebottle]

Re: Unfair Redundancy or NOT?

I'm going to bump this thread for one of our Employment Law experts to look in and advise you.

:bump:

[miliitant]

Re: Unfair Redundancy or NOT?

This is discrimination if your job roll within the company is being made redundant and they then stoop to fill the position with somebody else. First thing, is the job roll that is being made redundant had a significant change in job description and duties, please be honest. Second question was as your job was being made redundant, were you offered the new position as you state some one else is filling the post, or another position within the company. Last question, how long have you been employed for by the company as this seems a classic case of slimming down staff numbers through the back door

[birdman]

Re: Unfair Redundancy or NOT?

Hi

As a former employer until recently I offer my understanding, and belief, whether it is the law may is open to discussion.

Time with an employer is everything, the role is in reality largely irrelevant.

If your replacement was a new guy off the street, then you would have a complaint, providing you have been with the organisation for a minimum of 6 months, without any formal extension to your likely contractual trial period.

If the person replacing you has time seniority then the company will argue fair selection for redundancy, if compensatory redundancy is an issue they will naturally take the most inexpensive route.

Birdman

If there are other criteria I have missed or don't understand

[gobezza]

Re: Unfair Redundancy or NOT?

Everything in the new job description is everything I already do, the only change is to the title and after evaluation, the grading. I was a Level 8 and the new job is a Level 7.

I wasn't offered the new post and they couldn't offer me an equivalent. The person filling the role was also at risk but before this we did different jobs. I was the only 1 in the company doing my job.

I've been with the company 10 years, but in this role on a permanant basis since Sept 17th 2012.

There was 19 people At Risk but 24 Job Roles, it was more a re-structure that we had to try and fit into than a cost saving exercise with a re-location thrown in.....

My role didn't exist in the new structure until I challenged it then they introduced my role back into the structure under a different name.

Hope that helps!

[gobezza]

Re: Unfair Redundancy or NOT?

Hi

As a former employer until recently I offer my understanding, and belief, whether it is the law may is open to discussion.

Time with an employer is everything, the role is in reality largely irrelevant.

If your replacement was a new guy off the street, then you would have a complaint, providing you have been with the organisation for a minimum of 6 months, without any formal extension to your likely contractual trial period.

If the person replacing you has time seniority then the company will argue fair selection for redundancy, if compensatory redundancy is an issue they will naturally take the most inexpensive route.

Birdman

If there are other criteria I have missed or don't understand

The guy replacing me did a different job before this, I was the only 1 in the company who did this.

I'd been there longer by 2 years.

[birdman]

Re: Unfair Redundancy or NOT?

Hi

Please more info on the 10 years with under 3 months in this new role.

Ignoring the legal protocols of making somebody redundant and the perils of getting that wrong.

The basis of your question has to be "have I been properly selected for redundancy"

It sounds a little haphazard that the role was gone and then came back when you complained, this indicates that other processes may be faulty.

Is the guy selected for the new role a pet, friend, family, old Jack, why do you think he got the gig and not you.

Birdman

[gobezza]

Re: Unfair Redundancy or NOT?

Hi

Please more info on the 10 years with under 3 months in this new role.

Ignoring the legal protocols of making somebody redundant and the perils of getting that wrong.

The basis of your question has to be "have I been properly selected for redundancy"

It sounds a little haphazard that the role was gone and then came back when you complained, this indicates that other processes may be faulty.

Is the guy selected for the new role a pet, friend, family, old Jack, why do you think he got the gig and not you.

Birdman

I did 9 years ish as an engineer, then joined this team within the business on a secondment for several months which turned permanent in Sept 2012.

Why he got the job? I really don't know...... I was prepped by directors to challenge the missing role, which I did, it was added but between interview and outcome, he got it not me!

I don't think I should have had to interview for it, if it's my role being advertised then I'm not at risk am I?

[birdman]

Re: Unfair Redundancy or NOT?

If you are sure that the "new role" is the same as the current role that you occupy. If you are senior to the new guy then I think you have been "improperly selected for redundancy.

When the 9 years as a engineer ended was there a redundancy issue then, has your employment been contractually continuous.

From what I am getting from you, it feels like the whole process may be floored, should the worst happen, it should be investigated,make sure you are keeping good records.

Type "improper selection for redundancy " into Google interesting reading.

You have to satisfy yourself of this, and why. If you do, I think its is time to find a big hitter, which sadly may mean compensation rather than salary, not always but that is the hard truth, don't forget that if you are correct they may also have constructively dismissed you. If your company has cocked this up go for them.

Sort out how you feel and find that Big Hitter.

Good luck

Birdman

[miliitant]

Re: Unfair Redundancy or NOT?

Might i add this is not constructive dismissal but unfair/unlawful dismissal. If you put in a claim for constructive dismissal then you will end up with nothing in my opinion.

[birdman]

Re: Unfair Redundancy or NOT?

Hi

I agree with you Alsatian, I said this, as these things normally have a terminal element to them.

I suggest Constructive dismissal not as a first tactic, but by doing what they have, they have caused you to feel unvalued both in your eyes and in the eyes of others, and is worth bearing in mind, when deciding whether, if you win, do you want the job back or not, this would have a bearing on any likely settlement.

Birdman

[miliitant]

Re: Unfair Redundancy or NOT?

Allmost all successful claims to the tribunal service result in an uplift due to the fact reemployment does not happen in the real world with the same company. Even though you put in reinstatement at the case management stage

constructive dismissal results in a complete breakdown in trust and breach of contract in that remaning has become intolerable. It results from an immediate resignation.