Forced to sign new contract for lower pay - or leave.
Discussion
Hi all, this isn't for me as I work for myself, but asking advice for a friend who was a work colleague at my last place of employment.
Basically it's a housing association, and they have to cut budgets all over to survive the new government policies on housing and rental income etc.
The staff are in the firing line as they are one of the biggest costs naturally.
My friend worked as a housing officer on around £28,000 per annum as did about 7 others. They have all been told that they aren't housing officers anymore, but will be doing seperare parts of a housing officer job each, so one will do lettings only, one will do the rent and chase debts, one will do the leasehold etc.
The company has said they will no longer be 'housing officers' but 'lettings assistant' etc each with a different title.
The new salary for the positions is £23,000. They have been told they can either sign the new contract for less money or resign.
My friend has worked there for about 14 years and the others are similar, some have been housing officers for over 20 years.
Naturally they don't want to have a £5000 pay cut as you can imagine. The workload between them all will remain the same, they will just being doing it differently.
Friend has refused to sign the new contract and had been told she will likely be dismissed.
Any thoughts on this?
Basically it's a housing association, and they have to cut budgets all over to survive the new government policies on housing and rental income etc.
The staff are in the firing line as they are one of the biggest costs naturally.
My friend worked as a housing officer on around £28,000 per annum as did about 7 others. They have all been told that they aren't housing officers anymore, but will be doing seperare parts of a housing officer job each, so one will do lettings only, one will do the rent and chase debts, one will do the leasehold etc.
The company has said they will no longer be 'housing officers' but 'lettings assistant' etc each with a different title.
The new salary for the positions is £23,000. They have been told they can either sign the new contract for less money or resign.
My friend has worked there for about 14 years and the others are similar, some have been housing officers for over 20 years.
Naturally they don't want to have a £5000 pay cut as you can imagine. The workload between them all will remain the same, they will just being doing it differently.
Friend has refused to sign the new contract and had been told she will likely be dismissed.
Any thoughts on this?
As far as I understand it they haven't been offered redundancy.
Several of them, including my mate, would actually take the redundancy and go work elsewhere if it was being offered, as they believe from reading their contracts that it would be a good few thousand each, £10,000 upwards in some cases
Several of them, including my mate, would actually take the redundancy and go work elsewhere if it was being offered, as they believe from reading their contracts that it would be a good few thousand each, £10,000 upwards in some cases
Edited by NinjaPower on Tuesday 13th September 13:16
anothernameitist said:
Do they want £23k or nothing.
Accept contract and get out.
happening all over with anything Government funded
Well they would prefer to keep the salary they signed up for years ago. Some of them went back to university to do degrees and endless courses in their own time specifically so they could obtain the role and the salary.Accept contract and get out.
happening all over with anything Government funded
If the company really wants them out to save money, then fair enough, but I would have thought redundancy payments are in order?
And they aren't directly government funded anymore and haven't been for many years. It's simply caps on what they are allowed to charge in rent imposed by the government.
ATG said:
Speaking entirely as a layman, as far as the HA is concerned how can this be anything other than a decision between offering them a new role or making them redundant? If your friend refuses to accept the new job, what else are the HA going to do other than make her redundant?
I agree, and she would take redundancy.But that's not being offered seemingly. Just accept the new role and salary or they will dismiss her.
The devil is in the detail, but yes an employer can dismiss and re-engage on lower terms, those that do not chose to take the new contract can be dismissed without compensation.
For the employer to be able to do this they must
1.) Have followed a fair process of consultation to attempt to reach prior agreement to the changes, exhausting other options, and
2.) Show they have dismissed fairly. In most cases this will rely on 'Some other substantial reason' (SOSR), by showing a real/compelling business case/financial pressure. This pressure would not need to be as drastic as liquidation though
Historically tribunals have been relatively sympathetic to companies in their 'SOSR' justifications.
However key points a Tribunal would want answered if the reason is cost based are
- Non-employee cost reductions having been sought or made, eg suppliers
- That the burden of reduction is not unequal eg management also have a reduction in pay
Breadvan of this parish would give a much better review if he was around.
As always your friend should seek professional advice from a competent employment lawyer, not from random car geeks
For the employer to be able to do this they must
1.) Have followed a fair process of consultation to attempt to reach prior agreement to the changes, exhausting other options, and
2.) Show they have dismissed fairly. In most cases this will rely on 'Some other substantial reason' (SOSR), by showing a real/compelling business case/financial pressure. This pressure would not need to be as drastic as liquidation though
Historically tribunals have been relatively sympathetic to companies in their 'SOSR' justifications.
However key points a Tribunal would want answered if the reason is cost based are
- Non-employee cost reductions having been sought or made, eg suppliers
- That the burden of reduction is not unequal eg management also have a reduction in pay
Breadvan of this parish would give a much better review if he was around.
As always your friend should seek professional advice from a competent employment lawyer, not from random car geeks
wsurfa said:
The devil is in the detail, but yes an employer can dismiss and re-engage on lower terms, those that do not chose to take the new contract can be dismissed without compensation.
For the employer to be able to do this they must
1.) Have followed a fair process of consultation to attempt to reach prior agreement to the changes, exhausting other options, and
2.) Show they have dismissed fairly. In most cases this will rely on 'Some other substantial reason' (SOSR), by showing a real/compelling business case/financial pressure. This pressure would not need to be as drastic as liquidation though
Historically tribunals have been relatively sympathetic to companies in their 'SOSR' justifications.
However key points a Tribunal would want answered if the reason is cost based are
- Non-employee cost reductions having been sought or made, eg suppliers
- That the burden of reduction is not unequal eg management also have a reduction in pay
Breadvan of this parish would give a much better review if he was around.
As always your friend should seek professional advice from a competent employment lawyer, not from random car geeks
Interesting. I did not know this.For the employer to be able to do this they must
1.) Have followed a fair process of consultation to attempt to reach prior agreement to the changes, exhausting other options, and
2.) Show they have dismissed fairly. In most cases this will rely on 'Some other substantial reason' (SOSR), by showing a real/compelling business case/financial pressure. This pressure would not need to be as drastic as liquidation though
Historically tribunals have been relatively sympathetic to companies in their 'SOSR' justifications.
However key points a Tribunal would want answered if the reason is cost based are
- Non-employee cost reductions having been sought or made, eg suppliers
- That the burden of reduction is not unequal eg management also have a reduction in pay
Breadvan of this parish would give a much better review if he was around.
As always your friend should seek professional advice from a competent employment lawyer, not from random car geeks
FGB said:
Alternatively She could tell them that's not how it works and they should go f
k themselves !
Tell your friend to get a lawyer / Citizen's Advice and take it from there !
Unfortunately, if the employer has followed the correct process, they can.k themselves !Tell your friend to get a lawyer / Citizen's Advice and take it from there !
A few years ago one of the local council dismissed its entire workforce and re-engaged them on about a 5% cut
FGB said:
wsurfa said:
FGB said:
Alternatively She could tell them that's not how it works and they should go fk themselves !
Tell your friend to get a lawyer / Citizen's Advice and take it from there !
Unfortunately, if the employer has followed the correct process, they can.k themselves !Tell your friend to get a lawyer / Citizen's Advice and take it from there !
A few years ago one of the local council dismissed its entire workforce and re-engaged them on about a 5% cut
As I said get a lawyer / advice from a professional.
Edit to add: It is quite possible that their process is flawed, which is what the specialist advice may help with
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 14th September 23:30
Countdown said:
Is this part of an organisation-wide "Job Evaluation/ Pay & Grading" review?
I'm guessing that, at some point, the HA would have been either an ALMO or part of the Council. In which case there would be a strong Union presence so your freind should refer to them as first point of call.
It's part of the latest round of 'consultations' or 'role review' programme. Several other departments such as finance and administration have all been shuffled around, but in those reviews, no one was asked to take a pay cut, but people were asked to move to different jobs for the same pay.I'm guessing that, at some point, the HA would have been either an ALMO or part of the Council. In which case there would be a strong Union presence so your freind should refer to them as first point of call.
The HA has always been an independent. It started as a 'Housing Society' opened as a charity in 1966. It has never been part of the council.
She has now spoken to a solicitor and I will update the thread when I learn more.
The situation right now, is that she as been asked to sign the new contract and therefore accept the new pay, she has refused to do so, and it has turned into a bit of a Mexican standoff...
She is still doing any and all work that is asked of her as normal. But it raises a point that if she starts performing her new role when asked to do so, is this seen as her accepting her new contract?
I can't help thinking this won't end well for her as the HA always have consultants and lawyers coming out of their ears before making any changes to jobs, salaries and anything else HR related. So the chances are they are well prepared for any and every outcome.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff