10 years extra responsibility

[tickled_pink]

I have been working for a company for over 22 years, for the last 10 years I have been taking on extra responsibilty which was completely different to my contracted role.
These responsibilities were initially equal to 50-50 of my time but over the 10 years grew until all of my time was spent on the other role.
2 years ago, we were informed a merger with another company was taking place and various redundancies occurred. I was asked to continue the other role and offered a Secondment for 2 years as there was no-one else with the skills, however in the other company there was an unfilled, official post but a lower grade to myself. 8 months into the Secondment, I started maternity leave. With 8 months left on the Secondment I returned on a part time basis, the other post has been filled internally without advertisement (now the same grade) and my Secondment effectively terminated and I am now expected to return to my original role that I have not been doing at all for the last 3 years.
My question – is there any part of employment law that protects my role based on the responsibilities for the last 10 years rather than job title?
I do not want to return to my old role and would prefer redundancy.
Any advice would be appreciated.
Thank you.

[teaboy2]

Re: 10 years extra responsibility

Yes "Customary Practice" - This means your the responsibilities you took on form the other role, whilst in your own role other the last ten years, have become implied terms of your contract in addition to the written terms. Implied terms do not need to be in writing, hence why its called customary practice. Those same Implied terms of your contract are also protected by TUPE, (Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) regulations) which protects you when your company is taken over by anther company and you become an employee of another employer/company.

The question is, when you went on secondment (which is to work elsewhere in the company) did you still carry out the same role and responsibilities. OR did you sign a new contract or employment when you went on the secondment? If so, your probably stuck between a rock and hard place depending on the contents of what you signed, as a new contract would replace the original one complete with new terms.

Best thing to do is think about this in logical terms. What will you gain by fighting this, given the role is now filled by someone else, as the company can not simply dismiss them because you wanted the role. If you fought it, chances are you will not have any role in the company and be searching for a new job whilst unemployed and you would have been deemed to have resigned as well, so no redundancy - By the way, its not you that's made redundant, its the role/position you fill that is made redundant. A person is merely paid redundancy money as compensation for their role/position being made redundant and no other role being available (or taken by the person) in the company that the person could fill.

[tickled_pink]

Re: 10 years extra responsibility

Thank you very much for your reply Teaboy2 - really, really helpful.

[stevemLS]

Re: 10 years extra responsibility

I disagree with teaboy, "custom and practice" would not protect you.

Whilst anyone is on a secondment it is plain that it is intended that they will return to their substantive role at some point.

You cannot "choose" redundancy unless your employer is operating a voluntary redundancy scheme.

[teaboy2]

Re: 10 years extra responsibility

I disagree with teaboy, "custom and practice" would not protect you.

Whilst anyone is on a secondment it is plain that it is intended that they will return to their substantive role at some point.

You cannot "choose" redundancy unless your employer is operating a voluntary redundancy scheme.

Regardless of the secondment, she was carrying out the duties of both roles for 10 years, prior to the company being taken over and her employment being transferred via TUPE. So the duties from the other role formed part of her contractual duties via customary practice as implied contractual terms, which would be protected by TUPE.

If there was no signing of any new contract/agreement when agreeing to the secondment (and dependent on the terms agreed if there was), then her original contract that was protected by TUPE is still in force along with all the terms written or implied as a result of customary practice or verbal agreement! So by returning to the "substantive" role, they are returning to the role as it was when they left it with all duties they did in said role when they left, unless they agreed or agree otherwise.

Though i suppose the question here would be, why would the OP want the extra duties, anyone else would be happy to return to their original role with less duties!