Am I being unfairly dismissed?
Discussion
Here is the background and I’ll try and keep this as brief as possible.
I currently work for a government regulation body. I’ve worked here for 2 years and 7 months, 10 of these months I spent working as contractor though an agency and the rest (1 year 9 months to date) I’ve spent working as a fixed term employee directly for the company. My job title (as stated on my original contract) and pay grade is the same as that of at least 6 other employees in my department, we all do very similar tasks. My contract has always had an end date but it has been extended no less that 8 times for a few months at a time due to the "work I am doing still continuing".
Now I have been verbally informed that my contract will not be extended beyond the end of October – hence the dismissal. I’ve been told the reason for this is a policy of not employing fixed term contractors for more than 2 years – it doesn’t take a leap of the imagination to know that this is because those employed for longer than 2 years gain rights to redundancy pay if dismissed.
Now they are have just started (without even telling me) internally advertising my current role and exact responsibilities for a further 6 month temporary contract beginning at the end of October. I have been informed in writing that I am not eligible to apply for any internally advertised role as I did not acquire my post through fair and open competition. I can only apply for external vacancies - I’ve been told this a number of times when wanting to apply for a permanent post here.
Does this seem to anyone to be a case of unfair dismissal? I have the same right to work as everyone else yet I am being selected for dismissal due to being a fixed term employee. The work I am doing is still continuing so redundancy of my post cannot be a reason for dismissal and I am not sure they can legally say that a 2 year maximum policy of fixed term employees is a reason for fair dismissal - not based on the Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment Regulations 2002.
Now I have little to no understanding of employment law other that when I have read on the internet and I can't afford a barrister so is anyone here studying\practicing employment law that might be able to give me some help?
I really feel like I am being diddled here – I like my job and want to keep working but I am basically being dismissed just to avoid the company having to pay any redundancy should my post become redundant in the next year. After almost 3 years hard work should I not deserve a bit of severance if they axe me?
If anyone can offer any advice on the subject I would be eternally grateful.
I currently work for a government regulation body. I’ve worked here for 2 years and 7 months, 10 of these months I spent working as contractor though an agency and the rest (1 year 9 months to date) I’ve spent working as a fixed term employee directly for the company. My job title (as stated on my original contract) and pay grade is the same as that of at least 6 other employees in my department, we all do very similar tasks. My contract has always had an end date but it has been extended no less that 8 times for a few months at a time due to the "work I am doing still continuing".
Now I have been verbally informed that my contract will not be extended beyond the end of October – hence the dismissal. I’ve been told the reason for this is a policy of not employing fixed term contractors for more than 2 years – it doesn’t take a leap of the imagination to know that this is because those employed for longer than 2 years gain rights to redundancy pay if dismissed.
Now they are have just started (without even telling me) internally advertising my current role and exact responsibilities for a further 6 month temporary contract beginning at the end of October. I have been informed in writing that I am not eligible to apply for any internally advertised role as I did not acquire my post through fair and open competition. I can only apply for external vacancies - I’ve been told this a number of times when wanting to apply for a permanent post here.
Does this seem to anyone to be a case of unfair dismissal? I have the same right to work as everyone else yet I am being selected for dismissal due to being a fixed term employee. The work I am doing is still continuing so redundancy of my post cannot be a reason for dismissal and I am not sure they can legally say that a 2 year maximum policy of fixed term employees is a reason for fair dismissal - not based on the Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment Regulations 2002.
Now I have little to no understanding of employment law other that when I have read on the internet and I can't afford a barrister so is anyone here studying\practicing employment law that might be able to give me some help?
I really feel like I am being diddled here – I like my job and want to keep working but I am basically being dismissed just to avoid the company having to pay any redundancy should my post become redundant in the next year. After almost 3 years hard work should I not deserve a bit of severance if they axe me?
If anyone can offer any advice on the subject I would be eternally grateful.
Are you in the PCS? Or you could try ACAS for advice.
My wife was a civil servant until recently and in her department as soon as the new Government came in all of the temporary and contract people were finished up immediately, and FTCs were run to their end date (all gone now). Then they ran a voluntary redundancy program and let a third of the staff go.
So you've done fairly well surviving this long.
My wife was a civil servant until recently and in her department as soon as the new Government came in all of the temporary and contract people were finished up immediately, and FTCs were run to their end date (all gone now). Then they ran a voluntary redundancy program and let a third of the staff go.
So you've done fairly well surviving this long.
I am paid in an identical way to all other permanent employees. I also am paid according to a pay grade scale so no, I do not get paid anymore than any other comparable permanent employee of the same grade/job title.
I’ve joined the PCS and I am waiting for my membership to come through – they do have a legal advice line so I will give that a try as well.
I have hung on this long, I was still hoping to find a way to get a permanent post but there is too much red tape. It’s pretty stressful being constantly on the edge of losing your job.
I’ve joined the PCS and I am waiting for my membership to come through – they do have a legal advice line so I will give that a try as well.
I have hung on this long, I was still hoping to find a way to get a permanent post but there is too much red tape. It’s pretty stressful being constantly on the edge of losing your job.
Erm. Doesn't "Fixed Term Employee" mean just that, they've employed your services for a fixed term. This is, as I understand it, markedly different to a full time employee.
Therefore, just because your previous "fixed terms" have been extended, it doesn't mean they have to do it again, nor make your role redundant etc. They are basically saying your fixed term has reached it's fixed term end.
Who told you it's because of the 2 year thing and how are they qualified to make such a statement?
Therefore, just because your previous "fixed terms" have been extended, it doesn't mean they have to do it again, nor make your role redundant etc. They are basically saying your fixed term has reached it's fixed term end.
Who told you it's because of the 2 year thing and how are they qualified to make such a statement?
Landlord said:
Erm. Doesn't "Fixed Term Employee" mean just that, they've employed your services for a fixed term. This is, as I understand it, markedly different to a full time employee.
Therefore, just because your previous "fixed terms" have been extended, it doesn't mean they have to do it again, nor make your role redundant etc. They are basically saying your fixed term has reached it's fixed term end.
Who told you it's because of the 2 year thing and how are they qualified to make such a statement?
If that was at me there is a limit in most companies in my industy that us contractors only pimp ourselves out for a maximum of 2 years at a company and then move on, its the way my industry works... not sure on OP.Therefore, just because your previous "fixed terms" have been extended, it doesn't mean they have to do it again, nor make your role redundant etc. They are basically saying your fixed term has reached it's fixed term end.
Who told you it's because of the 2 year thing and how are they qualified to make such a statement?
But Im of the thinking that when it comes to the end then I aint bothered and will look elsewhere as Im happy with that and as a non permy I expect it to come to an end at some point.
Im of the thinking that the OP who is a temp by his own description was not expecting it to end like this and wants some type of compensation...
For compesation you need to be permy and the role is no longer there... your case the temp/contract job is no longer there and now its permy and they quite frankly dont want you.
Being a fixed term employee isn’t the quite same as being an agency temp – you have and you have the right to be treated fairly and (after a year) the right not to be unfairly dismissed - see the Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment Regulations 2002.
Usually a fixed term contract ends when the work is completed or the post is redundant - Employers actually do need a reason for dismissal otherwise people could get the sack for any old bigoted reason. In my case there does not seem to be a clear cut reason for dismissal other then saying two years is the maximum – which it actually isn’t as temporary appointments can be extended further than this with approval from a commission.
Anyone that thinks I am out to grab some parting money or compensation is missing the point – I want to keep my job, I like what I do and I am very good at it. Wouldn’t you feel slightly upset being forced out of your job for no reason other then limiting your potential rights to redundancy?
There is absolutely no reason to get rid of me other than HR red tape. Every appraisal I’ve had has been overwhelmingly positive - I have received numerous recognition awards for performance and my sickness record is exemplary. I resent any implication that it is because “they just want to get rid of me”.
Usually a fixed term contract ends when the work is completed or the post is redundant - Employers actually do need a reason for dismissal otherwise people could get the sack for any old bigoted reason. In my case there does not seem to be a clear cut reason for dismissal other then saying two years is the maximum – which it actually isn’t as temporary appointments can be extended further than this with approval from a commission.
Anyone that thinks I am out to grab some parting money or compensation is missing the point – I want to keep my job, I like what I do and I am very good at it. Wouldn’t you feel slightly upset being forced out of your job for no reason other then limiting your potential rights to redundancy?
There is absolutely no reason to get rid of me other than HR red tape. Every appraisal I’ve had has been overwhelmingly positive - I have received numerous recognition awards for performance and my sickness record is exemplary. I resent any implication that it is because “they just want to get rid of me”.
Edited by Mintyhit on Wednesday 24th August 14:00
Du1point8 said:
If that was at me there is a limit in most companies in my industy that us contractors only pimp ourselves out for a maximum of 2 years at a company and then move on, its the way my industry works...
No, it was for the OP.Also, you and I work in the same industry, dude. Finance IT contractors. I know how it works (been doing it nearly 13 years). Whilst the 2 year thing is often bandied about, I've yet to meet anyone who's fallen victim to it.
I had fixed term contracts, 3 months at a time, after a year they got rid of me because it was proving too expensive to keep me rather than employ internally.
I'm afraid in this economic climate employers utilise contract/temp staff to their own ends and usually with the sanction of HR. OP I expect your HR has already been advised of the position and you may have to face up to the fact that you will have to look for another job.
Its a hard world out there at the moment and I really feel for you, especially as I have recently been in the same boat. Get a good reference from them! and Good Luck.
I'm afraid in this economic climate employers utilise contract/temp staff to their own ends and usually with the sanction of HR. OP I expect your HR has already been advised of the position and you may have to face up to the fact that you will have to look for another job.
Its a hard world out there at the moment and I really feel for you, especially as I have recently been in the same boat. Get a good reference from them! and Good Luck.
Landlord said:
Du1point8 said:
If that was at me there is a limit in most companies in my industy that us contractors only pimp ourselves out for a maximum of 2 years at a company and then move on, its the way my industry works...
No, it was for the OP.Also, you and I work in the same industry, dude. Finance IT contractors. I know how it works (been doing it nearly 13 years). Whilst the 2 year thing is often bandied about, I've yet to meet anyone who's fallen victim to it.
Mintyhit said:
Now they are have just started (without even telling me) internally advertising my current role and exact responsibilities for a further 6 month temporary contract beginning at the end of October. I have been informed in writing that I am not eligible to apply for any internally advertised role as I did not acquire my post through fair and open competition. I can only apply for external vacancies - I’ve been told this a number of times when wanting to apply for a permanent post here.
That practice is Civil Service wide. The system is set up to ensure that Civil Servants are redeployed rather than paid redundancy so as you haven't been employed as a substantive Civil Servant that will rule you out of applying.
Nevermind the fact that you may well be the best person to do the job and that a person who's spent 20 years in a totally different field will be shoehorned into your job regardless of their skills, aptitude or wishes. Just so long as it doesn't cost the Agency money in terms of paying redundancy that's all that matters...
A few people have got hold of the wrong end of the stick here - the OP is on a fixed term contract with a outfit that is in the public sector.
So he's an ordinary employee in every way except that he's not permanent, his contract of employement runs for a limited time. He gets paid the normal salary for his grade, gets sick and holiday pay and will probably also be in the public sector pension scheme. So he's not a contractor.
The reason for wanting to kick him out could well be that the Government lost an employment tribunal a few years ago where it was deemed that they had to pay redundancy pay to people on FTCs.
Bear in mind that not renewing an FTC even at the end of the contract can still be considered to be unfair dismissal, and the employer should make attempts to find another role. In particular, they're supposed to be made aware of other vacancies, which the OP seems to have been excluded from.
So he's an ordinary employee in every way except that he's not permanent, his contract of employement runs for a limited time. He gets paid the normal salary for his grade, gets sick and holiday pay and will probably also be in the public sector pension scheme. So he's not a contractor.
The reason for wanting to kick him out could well be that the Government lost an employment tribunal a few years ago where it was deemed that they had to pay redundancy pay to people on FTCs.
Bear in mind that not renewing an FTC even at the end of the contract can still be considered to be unfair dismissal, and the employer should make attempts to find another role. In particular, they're supposed to be made aware of other vacancies, which the OP seems to have been excluded from.
Babu 01 said:
That practice is Civil Service wide.
The system is set up to ensure that Civil Servants are redeployed rather than paid redundancy so as you haven't been employed as a substantive Civil Servant that will rule you out of applying.
Nevermind the fact that you may well be the best person to do the job and that a person who's spent 20 years in a totally different field will be shoehorned into your job regardless of their skills, aptitude or wishes. Just so long as it doesn't cost the Agency money in terms of paying redundancy that's all that matters...
When they did the last recruitment in my wife's ex-Department they rejected all the surplus from other departments applicants as unsuitable (this was for a run-of-the-mill clerical role that any established civil servant could do standing on their head) and interviewed and employed the office managers daughter.The system is set up to ensure that Civil Servants are redeployed rather than paid redundancy so as you haven't been employed as a substantive Civil Servant that will rule you out of applying.
Nevermind the fact that you may well be the best person to do the job and that a person who's spent 20 years in a totally different field will be shoehorned into your job regardless of their skills, aptitude or wishes. Just so long as it doesn't cost the Agency money in terms of paying redundancy that's all that matters...
Mintyhit said:
working as contractor though an agency and the rest
fixed term employee directly for the company.
employing fixed term contractors for more than 2 years
So, you're on a Fixed Term Employment Contract and it's not being renewed past it's current end-date? That is NOT dismissal.fixed term employee directly for the company.
employing fixed term contractors for more than 2 years
It does seem odd that you're not allowed to apply for internally advertised roles as you're effectively an employee until your FTE runs out. At our place FTEs are allowed full holiday and pension rights for the perod of their employment.
IainT said:
So, you're on a Fixed Term Employment Contract and it's not being renewed past it's current end-date? That is NOT dismissal.
Yes it is. And it could potentially be unfair dismissal.IainT said:
This is the bit that seems odd from the OP. Normally they'd be allowed/encouraged to apply for such roles.
I suppose they'll say that surplus permanent employees should be considered first - which is probably reasonable.If I went for a job which turned out ti be a fixed term then the end date would be a massively obvious and important bit of info that would make me consider the implications come the end date. I would have started looking for my next job three or four months before my end date depending on notice period terms.
If you and the employer have agreed from the outset to finish work on a certain date then I really hope any tribunal would hold it to be fair that you finish work on that certain date.
If you and the employer have agreed from the outset to finish work on a certain date then I really hope any tribunal would hold it to be fair that you finish work on that certain date.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff