Been told my role is at risk...less than 2 months after verbal disciplinary

[avacado]

Hi all,

I'm 26, an MSc graduate and have been at this food company for 15 months. I will have 3 years experience in food NPD this December.

My manager that hired me stepped down at christmas to begin the transition to retirement. The new manager who was brought in, I feel took a disliking to me, and this culminated in a disciplinary hearing at the end of May. I countered all the points with hard evidence (vs hearsay) but was given a verbal written warning relating to my "performance and capability".

I immediately appealed this, citing the reasons from company handbook that the (1) disciplinary process had not been fairly followed , and (2) in which case the punishment was excessive in respect of the recorded crime.

Anyway, after a long wait my appeal hearing finally rolled around this past friday. It was with the HR director and my bosses boss. They began the meeting saying we apologise to not go straight into your appeal but some other company business has come to head.

They went into some drivel about sales growth not meeting targets etc, and that in cost saving measures they were looking at 11 redundancies across the business, and low and behold the 1 from my department would be my role.

I'm not shocked, because I got the feeling my manager probably wants me out, what i'm concerned about is how they can justify it. The company is a £150 million turnover operation with hundreds of employees, has just opened an international office, and has been heavily recruiting in the past months, including 2 graduates who have started less than 2 months ago, and 1 further lower experiences person a month before that. Other departments have been having plenty of new people also.

I'm just wondering how they can have inexperienced graduates still in their probation period, seen as more valuable then someone who has been there for much longer, and by industry standards I would say I'm below average on the salary scale for my experience and qualifications.

Obviously my manager will have had something to do with this, and since the disciplinary I have been actively seeking new roles, but summer is probably not the best time for this industry. I'm worried i'm going to be let go and not have time to get anything lined up, and that as i've not been there 2 years I have no rights.

As a department, there is about 20 people, and the structure is pretty flat, one manager, one supervisor, 18 technologists/assistants.

One technologist recently moved sideways into a related role, I am well versed in all of his responsibilities and have been handed his accounts. Yet one of the graduates that brought it was referred to as his "replacement".

As a candidate profile, i've got the highest level food qualification in the department, middle experience levels, and in 15 months I have never taken any sick or bereavement leave. Also of the 20 persons, only 3 are men , me one of them.

I basically need to do what I can to fight this and hold on as long as possible to get another job. Just any advice relating to all this would be very useful as i haven't got a clue what is going to happen at the consultation.

Thanks for reading.

Joe

[charitynjw]

Re: Been told my role is at risk...less than 2 months after verbal disciplinary

Hi Joe, & welcome to Legal Beagles.

Could you tell us the precise date on which you commenced employment with the firm?

[avacado]

Re: Been told my role is at risk...less than 2 months after verbal disciplinary

Hello, thank you for your reply.

I began April 30th 2012

[smileyculture]

Re: Been told my role is at risk...less than 2 months after verbal disciplinary

Hello, I think your being asked the date you started as the 2 year Employment rule started on the 6th April 2012, which means your contract is easier to end for the employer as long as they follow the correct procedures. Sorry to be blunt but this is another change that should never have been allowed in my view. As for your job, don't treat it as a "fight", you want to keep it, so show you are the Right person for it. Good Luck

[charitynjw]

Re: Been told my role is at risk...less than 2 months after verbal disciplinary

Employment Rights Act 1996
s94(1)

94The right.

(1)

An employee has the right not to be unfairly dismissed by his employer.

[teaboy2]

Re: Been told my role is at risk...less than 2 months after verbal disciplinary

Ok 2 year employment period aside. As qualifying period doesn't apply to all automatic unfair dismissal cases - http://www.xperthr.co.uk/article/104...dismissal.aspx

105 Redundancy.

(1)An employee who is dismissed shall be regarded for the purposes of this Part as unfairly dismissed if—

(a)the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for the dismissal is that the employee was redundant,

(b)it is shown that the circumstances constituting the redundancy applied equally to one or more other employees in the same undertaking who held positions similar to that held by the employee and who have not been dismissed by the employer, and

(c)it is shown that any of subsections (2A) to (7N) applies.

(2A)This subsection applies if the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for which the employee was selected for dismissal was one of those specified in subsection (1) of section 98B (unless the case is one to which subsection (2) of that section applies).

NOTE: 98B is related to Jury Service.

(7N) This subsection applies if the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for which the employee was selected for dismissal was one specified in paragraph (3) of regulation 17 of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 (unless the case is one to which paragraph (4) of that regulation applies).



So need to no the facts about the disciplinary as its clear to me that only the OP is being made redundant where others in the same role are keeping there jobs and others are even being employed in same or similar role, and that the circumstances constituting the redundancy may not have been applied equally to them - OP Please correct me if this statement is wrong!

Can you provide us the details that what led to the disciplinary in the first place, simply stating the new manger took a dislike to you isn't something we can go on. We need to know the facts and what the incident was etc, whether there has been any harassment (Sexual or bullying included) or inappropriate actions by the new manger towards yourself prior to this.

Basically once we know the full facts and back story of what lead to the disciplinary we may be able to use that to fight the redundancy.

Also you mentioned the appeal hearing, but what was the actual outcome of that hearing, did they uphold, decide in your favor it or did they simply forgo the hearing completely and just use it to advise you your being made redundant instead? Which of course would be a breach of the ACAS code of practice on Disciplinary & Grievance Procedures, though not legally binding as their predecessor was, a tribunal will still take them into consideration as the principles are still the same.

Has there also been any formal meeting held by the company were all that may face redundancy were asked to attend to be informed they face redundancy? If not then you may have a good case.