Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

[trufflestu]

Hi Everyone,

As the title suggests, I have recently been made redundant (10 days ago).

The company I worked for were advertising for the same role as I had before they made me redundant, as they were looking for someone else to join the team as we had so much work to do that we needed another person in the team to help with the workload.

I was made redundant, and queried this with my director and line manager as to why they were making me redundant, when they were advertising for someone in my role, i was told that they weren't looking for anyone anymore and they were making redundancies instead.

Well they are still advertising for my position on the company website, (I have been taking screen shots everyday for the last 10 days)

Then I received a phone call today from a recruitment agency, who asked if I was interested in applying for an opportunity that had newly become available which was the same job I had been made redundant from. (I played dumb and said I'd need to think about it)

Where do I stand on this surely they can't advertise my job before and after making me redundant, if the role has been made redundant

Do I need to appeal my redundancy, and then pursue an unfair dismissal case against them?

I would have liked to have joined this forum in nicer circumstances, but I suppose people only come to these when they need advice in bad times.

Thanks in advance.

Stuart

[Eloise01]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

When did you start your employment with the company, and what kind of contract did you have with them?

[trufflestu]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

Wow!

I wasn't expecting anyone to come back that quickly.

I started my employment in May 2011, and I was on a permanent contract.

I'm not expecting any redundancy payment as I know I'm not entitled to one, it's the fact they are still advertising for my role.

[Eloise01]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

OK. What you have is a smoking gun. But that IS NOT evidence of murder! There is such a thing as a SNAFU. If you don't know what that is, google it because I might get banned for language like that!

Agencies can screw up. They advertise jobs that don't exist or don't exist any more. So the "kill shot" is the employer moving to recruit someone. The advert doesn't prove that they will. Do you know anyone who would be ideal for this job, who you could convince to apply? You have a little time on your side. If it's on a website for the company, a few friends accidentally recording a call that could prove they are actually recruiting? What you need is that next bit, the actual attempt to recruit.

[trufflestu]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

The agency was instructed last week, the advert is on the company website, as it was before I was made redundant. Unfortunately it's only e-mail contact.

The agency attempted to recruit me, is that not enough?

[Eloise01]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

The agency isn't the employer. And they aren't going to provide you with evidence against a client, because if they do they are finished with that client. . If it is email only contact, what about a new email account and doctoring your CV to appear as someone else? What you need is some evidence that they are recruiting to the same job from the employer.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

An excuse commonly used in the City to get rid of people and hire new ones or get temps to replace permanent staff was "the role has changed". I don't know how much change there would have to be for it to be a valid argument. :noidea:

[alham]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

An excuse commonly used in the City to get rid of people and hire new ones or get temps to replace permanent staff was "the role has changed". I don't know how much change there would have to be for it to be a valid argument. :noidea:

The change of roles has to be substantial, at least 50% but then they will have to explain why OP was not offered a chance to apply for this job?

[Eloise01]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

The change of roles has to be substantial, at least 50% but then they will have to explain why OP was not offered a chance to apply for this job?

But there is no such rule! Yes, if there is "another role" the employer may have to explain why the OP wasn't offered it - but there is no 50% (or any other %) rule.

[alham]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

But there is no such rule! Yes, if there is "another role" the employer may have to explain why the OP wasn't offered it - but there is no 50% (or any other %) rule.

You right, officially no such rule but substantial "role change" can (and has been) be accepted to the tribunal.

[Eloise01]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

I ddin't say it wouldn't be - but there is no percentage and that isn't how a tribunal looks at role change. It's misleading to suggest that there is a percentage - a role could change by 80% and still be accepted by a tribunal, or as little as 5% and not be. It is what the change is that they examine - not percentages.

[Ruby]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

To be honest, it sounds like there was a 'conflict of personality' internally or perhaps wanting to get ride of one member of staff to replace them with another at a less cost......

Its not that easy (thankfully) to get rid of staff so something needs to be fabricated for what ever reason.

[Eloise01]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

That is possible - and reducing costs may actually be a fair reason although the employee should first be offered the opportunity to take the job at a reduced wage. The problem is that there are a lot of possibilities, and none of them are relevant - the employer either fairly dismissed or they did not, whatever their reason. It sounds as though the employer may not have done, but there is not absolute proof of that. At this stage, the OP has the fact that they have been dismissed by reason of redundancy, and some advertisemnets for a job which they say is theirs. But the employer can still turn around and say that the advertisment was placed on the website in error, or that they were testing the market for the future, or any one of dozens of excuses; and that the agency picked it up from there. It is the act of recruiting that clinches the argument that the employer has lied about this.

[trufflestu]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

Sorry I haven't been back to update this but here is the update:-

[trufflestu]

Re: Made redundant, they are advertising for my job before and still are after.

I have got a friend to apply for my old job as is advertised. The company has also employed somebody else in the role now and I have there name.

I have written my letter of appeal as well, which I think is concise and to the point, leaving nothing out.

Dear xxxxxx,

On Wednesday xxxx March I was informed by you in person at an unscheduled meeting that I was being made redundant.

I would like to appeal against this decision as I believe that I have been treated unfairly and removed from the role without justification.

I wish the following information to be taken into account:

1. I believe this is a dismissal rather than a redundancy, based on the fact that no consultation was undertaken with me and the proper and appropriate redundancy process was not followed by xxxxxxxx.

1. I have not received any written confirmation from xxxxxxxxxx confirming the redundancy and explaining the reasons for it

1. I have not been advised by xxxxxxxx how I should appeal my redundancy

1. I believe there should have been a selection pool of candidates short listed for potential redundancy. Each person within the pool should have been assessed against specific, quantifiable criteria to assess their suitability for redundancy. The pool should have consisted of the whole xxxxxxxxx department and an objective and transparent review carried out within the terms of the stated criteria

1. My allegedly redundant role is currently being advertised by xxxxxxx. I am aware that xxxxxx has, since my redundancy, made an offer of employment to someone in a like role and under the terms of redundancy this role should have been offered to me as an alternative. Also since my redundancy, I have been contacted by a recruitment agent advising of job opportunities within xxxxxxx. This shows that xxxxxxx is actively recruiting staff and again, within the terms of the redundancy process, I should have been offered suitable alternative roles within the company

1. During my redundancy meeting some performance issues were raised which I challenged at the time. I would bring to your attention that I have received no warnings as to my performance with xxxxxxxxx nor have I been placed on any development or action plans to address any alleged shortcomings in my performance

Summary of Appeal
As I understand Employment Law, the following should apply when making an employee redundant:

§The selection procedure must be fair – this was not the case as there was no selection pool of candidates short listed for redundancy simply an arbitrary decision made to single me out
§Employers should consider alternative to redundancy – this was not the case as I was offered no alternative when clearly there were opportunities for me still within xxxxxxx
§The employee should be consulted about the redundancy – I received no prior consultation about the redundancy and was simply advised of the redundancy and then escorted from the building 10 minutes later
§The employer should take reasonable steps to redeploy affected employees – again, there was no effort made to redeploy me within xxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxx has not adhered to the proper redundancy procedure nor has it adhered to the proper procedure for dismissal due to performance issues. In short the termination of my employment with xxxxxxx was unfair and unlawful.

I have consulted with ACAS about the issues I have with my dismissal and I will look to pursue an unfair dismissal claim against xxxxxxx through an employment tribunal if this proves necessary with regards to the termination of my employment. I am willing to enter into mediation via ACAS so that a suitable resolution can be found to cover my unfair dismissal. I will be looking to receive recompense of xxx months salary in lieu of termination of my employment.

I look forward to hearing from you within the next 7 days from the date of this letter. If I receive no response I will draw the conclusion that you are willing to proceed to tribunal and do not wish to discuss my grievances.

Yours sincerely



xxxxxxxxxxx