Position Placed at Risk
Discussion
I need some advice pretty quick.. I have an appointment with a solicitor next week but i have my redundancy consultation with HR on Friday this week..
I am in a group of 4 who are up for consultation. we have been told that there is only enough work for 3 of us going forward.
The company has in the last 3 month recruited 4 people at a grade lower than ours, One of the new starters applied for the same grade as us but was offered a lower grade which he accpeted.
It is my opinion that the management team have deliberately recruited additional staff at a lower grade to save money, and there by making a more senior member of staff obsolete. Would this be grounds of unfair dismissal and not redundency. I for one have a secure project workload until May 2011.
Another email was sent round the office for everyone to work 40 hours per week instead of the contracted 36 hours. Again i see this as asking other to take on additional work to cover the fact that some members are being made redundent.
I am seeking legal advice seperately, as this just stinks of unfair dismissal.
Anyone have any thoughts
I am in a group of 4 who are up for consultation. we have been told that there is only enough work for 3 of us going forward.
The company has in the last 3 month recruited 4 people at a grade lower than ours, One of the new starters applied for the same grade as us but was offered a lower grade which he accpeted.
It is my opinion that the management team have deliberately recruited additional staff at a lower grade to save money, and there by making a more senior member of staff obsolete. Would this be grounds of unfair dismissal and not redundency. I for one have a secure project workload until May 2011.
Another email was sent round the office for everyone to work 40 hours per week instead of the contracted 36 hours. Again i see this as asking other to take on additional work to cover the fact that some members are being made redundent.
I am seeking legal advice seperately, as this just stinks of unfair dismissal.
Anyone have any thoughts
Edited by stevieb on Thursday 29th October 09:18
stevieb said:
I need some advice pretty quick.. I have an appointment with a solicitor next week but i have my redundancy consultation with HR on Friday this week..
I am in a group of 4 who are up for consultation. we have been told that there is only enough work for 3 of us going forward.
The company has in the last 3 month recruited 4 people at a grade lower than ours, One of the new starters applied for the same grade as us but was offered a lower grade which he accpeted.
It is my opinion that the management team have deliberately recruited additional staff at a lower grade to save money, and there by making a more senior member of staff obsolete. Would this be grounds of unfair dismissal and not redundency. I for one have a secure project workload until May 2011.
Another email was sent round the office for everyone to work 40 hours per week instead of the contracted 36 hours. Again i see this as asking other to take on additional work to cover the fact that some members are being made redundent.
I am seeking legal advice seperately, as this just stinks of unfair dismissal.
Anyone have any thoughts
Without knowing any other details then difficut to comment but:I am in a group of 4 who are up for consultation. we have been told that there is only enough work for 3 of us going forward.
The company has in the last 3 month recruited 4 people at a grade lower than ours, One of the new starters applied for the same grade as us but was offered a lower grade which he accpeted.
It is my opinion that the management team have deliberately recruited additional staff at a lower grade to save money, and there by making a more senior member of staff obsolete. Would this be grounds of unfair dismissal and not redundency. I for one have a secure project workload until May 2011.
Another email was sent round the office for everyone to work 40 hours per week instead of the contracted 36 hours. Again i see this as asking other to take on additional work to cover the fact that some members are being made redundent.
I am seeking legal advice seperately, as this just stinks of unfair dismissal.
Anyone have any thoughts
Edited by stevieb on Thursday 29th October 09:18
- what is the relevance of the grades?
- should the different grades of same job role be treated as one single pool?
- if it is the case that there is not enough 'senior' work then alternative approaches might be short-term reduction in hours, reeployment to on eof the more 'junior' roles.
There are subtle difference in the grade banding.. My Grade is to lead the over all project but the grade below is to lead smaller elements of work on the project. In Reality there is not much difference..
Between a high performer at the lower grade and a poor performer at the higher grade..
They have already asked people to work unpaid overtime to get the project completed and there profitability up.
They are not looking at other options of reducing peoples hours.. I am more than happy to do a 4 day week to prevent any of us getting the boot..
Between a high performer at the lower grade and a poor performer at the higher grade..
They have already asked people to work unpaid overtime to get the project completed and there profitability up.
They are not looking at other options of reducing peoples hours.. I am more than happy to do a 4 day week to prevent any of us getting the boot..
swerni said:
They will put a matrix together and measure all of you against that.
They have to share this with you and how you scored, they won't show you the others scored.
hope it all works out Steve !!!!
We will see how this works out in the course of the next few weeks... But I really fancy getting away for a while to clear my head..They have to share this with you and how you scored, they won't show you the others scored.
hope it all works out Steve !!!!
With regard to the matrix, do you have a chance to challenge this??
stevieb said:
I need some advice pretty quick.. I have an appointment with a solicitor next week but i have my redundancy consultation with HR on Friday this week..
I am in a group of 4 who are up for consultation. we have been told that there is only enough work for 3 of us going forward.
The company has in the last 3 month recruited 4 people at a grade lower than ours, One of the new starters applied for the same grade as us but was offered a lower grade which he accpeted.
It is my opinion that the management team have deliberately recruited additional staff at a lower grade to save money, and there by making a more senior member of staff obsolete. Would this be grounds of unfair dismissal and not redundency. I for one have a secure project workload until May 2011.
Another email was sent round the office for everyone to work 40 hours per week instead of the contracted 36 hours. Again i see this as asking other to take on additional work to cover the fact that some members are being made redundent.
I am seeking legal advice seperately, as this just stinks of unfair dismissal.
Anyone have any thoughts?
My thoughts in your quote, marked by bullets.I am in a group of 4 who are up for consultation. we have been told that there is only enough work for 3 of us going forward.
- Redundancy situation, if true. Is there less work for you than before?
The company has in the last 3 month recruited 4 people at a grade lower than ours, One of the new starters applied for the same grade as us but was offered a lower grade which he accpeted.
- Not really relevant. The company has got its recruitment strategy wrong. It has too many staff now. Either that or it wants to restructure with lower grade staff supported by fewer higher grade staff.
It is my opinion that the management team have deliberately recruited additional staff at a lower grade to save money, and there by making a more senior member of staff obsolete. Would this be grounds of unfair dismissal and not redundency. I for one have a secure project workload until May 2011.
- Saving money is grounds for redundancy, not unfair dismissal.
Another email was sent round the office for everyone to work 40 hours per week instead of the contracted 36 hours. Again i see this as asking other to take on additional work to cover the fact that some members are being made redundent.
- More hours. This is strange given you have seemingly less work. However, given there is a restructuring (which is a form of redundancy), then the extra 12 hours a week will set off against the 36 hours lost by dimsissing an employee. All sounds like redundancy to me.
I am seeking legal advice seperately, as this just stinks of unfair dismissal.
Anyone have any thoughts?
RichBurley said:
My thoughts in your quote, marked by bullets.
Many Thanks for giving me a differnt perspective on this.. I have my options open, and will continue to fight as much as i can to kep my job. But ultimately i am getting prepared to look elsewhere.. Its just that it 5 minutes away from home and i work 7:30-4pm and it fits in nicely..
Steve
Edited by stevieb on Friday 30th October 14:11
stevieb said:
RichBurley said:
My thoughts in your quote, marked by bullets.
Many Thanks for giving me a differnt perspective on this.. I have my options open, and will continue to fight as much as i can to kep my job. But ultimately i am getting prepared to look elsewhere.. Its just that it 5 minutes away from home and i work 7:30-4pm and it fits in nicely..
Steve
stevieb said:
swerni said:
They will put a matrix together and measure all of you against that.
They have to share this with you and how you scored, they won't show you the others scored.
hope it all works out Steve !!!!
We will see how this works out in the course of the next few weeks... But I really fancy getting away for a while to clear my head..They have to share this with you and how you scored, they won't show you the others scored.
hope it all works out Steve !!!!
With regard to the matrix, do you have a chance to challenge this??
Oh well had my consultation.. I will no either way on the 9th November if i still have ajob..
But what ever they decide who ever goes will be placed on gardening leave to serve out there notice period and then will recieve the redundancy payment At least that will give me 12 weeks to secure another Job.
But what ever they decide who ever goes will be placed on gardening leave to serve out there notice period and then will recieve the redundancy payment At least that will give me 12 weeks to secure another Job.
stevieb said:
Oh well had my consultation.. I will no either way on the 9th November if i still have ajob..
But what ever they decide who ever goes will be placed on gardening leave to serve out there notice period and then will recieve the redundancy payment At least that will give me 12 weeks to secure another Job.
If the worst happens, then ask about pay in lieu of notice rather than garden leave - you leave straight away but with your pay for the notice period, too. But what ever they decide who ever goes will be placed on gardening leave to serve out there notice period and then will recieve the redundancy payment At least that will give me 12 weeks to secure another Job.
That way, if you get a job quickly you get to keep the cash whereas if you're on GL and the same thing happened you would have to ask to be released from your contract and they could potentially withold that cash.
I have the whole lot Health/Dental/pension/phone/internet paid for at home.
I have an offline chat with another director, and he interviening in the process as he is saying that i should not be in this process at all.
All i can say is that i now can see the company for what they are, and how they do business. I am seeing that there is a long term plan for them to stop doing my line of work all together. Its high fees but also high risk business if anything goes wrong.
I have applied for 3 jobs in London already, one directly with the Local governemtn who i have a project ending with next month. They are keen to have me on there team.. Its just a faff as i will need to train it into to london bridge everyday.. Rather than a 5 minute drive or 20 minute cycle.
I have an offline chat with another director, and he interviening in the process as he is saying that i should not be in this process at all.
All i can say is that i now can see the company for what they are, and how they do business. I am seeing that there is a long term plan for them to stop doing my line of work all together. Its high fees but also high risk business if anything goes wrong.
I have applied for 3 jobs in London already, one directly with the Local governemtn who i have a project ending with next month. They are keen to have me on there team.. Its just a faff as i will need to train it into to london bridge everyday.. Rather than a 5 minute drive or 20 minute cycle.
Ok Bit of an update..
Surprisingly, we are all working together tomake the whole process as difficult as possible for the company. We have come up with a realistic option for all of us to reduce our working hours (and Salary). Therefore all of us will do a 4 day week we on average saves a comparible amount of money when compared to the average salary at my level.
Would this option be a strong enough argument in terms of redendancy law to protect any of us from getting the boot. As we see this as a good option going forward and still maintains the skill in the team while reducing cost.
There are other aspects of this which do not agree with the company policy.. Impliment an overtime ban.. The department have done the oposite and are activily asking people to do more hours as there is the work to sustain overtime. Fore example the guy who sits next to me works 57 hours a week and has done for the past year!
Things do not add up with me, and it seems they dont want someone in the team and are using the redunancy process as a way to get them out.
Surprisingly, we are all working together tomake the whole process as difficult as possible for the company. We have come up with a realistic option for all of us to reduce our working hours (and Salary). Therefore all of us will do a 4 day week we on average saves a comparible amount of money when compared to the average salary at my level.
Would this option be a strong enough argument in terms of redendancy law to protect any of us from getting the boot. As we see this as a good option going forward and still maintains the skill in the team while reducing cost.
There are other aspects of this which do not agree with the company policy.. Impliment an overtime ban.. The department have done the oposite and are activily asking people to do more hours as there is the work to sustain overtime. Fore example the guy who sits next to me works 57 hours a week and has done for the past year!
Things do not add up with me, and it seems they dont want someone in the team and are using the redunancy process as a way to get them out.
stevieb said:
Ok Bit of an update..
Surprisingly, we are all working together tomake the whole process as difficult as possible for the company. We have come up with a realistic option for all of us to reduce our working hours (and Salary). Therefore all of us will do a 4 day week we on average saves a comparible amount of money when compared to the average salary at my level.
Would this option be a strong enough argument in terms of redendancy law to protect any of us from getting the boot. As we see this as a good option going forward and still maintains the skill in the team while reducing cost.
There are other aspects of this which do not agree with the company policy.. Impliment an overtime ban.. The department have done the oposite and are activily asking people to do more hours as there is the work to sustain overtime. Fore example the guy who sits next to me works 57 hours a week and has done for the past year!
Things do not add up with me, and it seems they dont want someone in the team and are using the redunancy process as a way to get them out.
Ultimately, it is the company that will decide - remember this is a consultation, not a negotiation, so no, even if you present a compelling case they are not obliged to accept it.Surprisingly, we are all working together tomake the whole process as difficult as possible for the company. We have come up with a realistic option for all of us to reduce our working hours (and Salary). Therefore all of us will do a 4 day week we on average saves a comparible amount of money when compared to the average salary at my level.
Would this option be a strong enough argument in terms of redendancy law to protect any of us from getting the boot. As we see this as a good option going forward and still maintains the skill in the team while reducing cost.
There are other aspects of this which do not agree with the company policy.. Impliment an overtime ban.. The department have done the oposite and are activily asking people to do more hours as there is the work to sustain overtime. Fore example the guy who sits next to me works 57 hours a week and has done for the past year!
Things do not add up with me, and it seems they dont want someone in the team and are using the redunancy process as a way to get them out.
If the aim is cost saving and this achieves it, then they may go for it, who knows? If the agenda is a different one, which you've alluded to, then that individual will be going, one suspects.
Certainly seems strange that significant overtime is being worked whilst headcount is being planned to reduce...
RichBurley said:
Might seem strange, but it is probably the firm overlooking expenses like this which is why a redundancy situation has been created. From the information provided so far, it does sound like a genuine redundancy situation in this instance.
OK.. But from us people on the Coal face doing the work.. We do not forsee that any of our work is reducing considerably in the next 6 months to warrant a redundancy at ths stage. The company employs 11000 people in the UK, and we have learnt that the decision for one of us to go has been made by the Board and is not a local decision....
As our department covers 7 offices and there are 20 poeple at the same grade as me... Shouldnt the selection pool be open to the other offices rather than just targeting us 4??
Personally I dont mind making this awkward for the company, as i woudl much rather be a Rat from a sinking ship than be forced to walk the plank. I want to follow my own agenda..
stevieb said:
RichBurley said:
Might seem strange, but it is probably the firm overlooking expenses like this which is why a redundancy situation has been created. From the information provided so far, it does sound like a genuine redundancy situation in this instance.
OK.. But from us people on the Coal face doing the work.. We do not forsee that any of our work is reducing considerably in the next 6 months to warrant a redundancy at ths stage. The company employs 11000 people in the UK, and we have learnt that the decision for one of us to go has been made by the Board and is not a local decision....
As our department covers 7 offices and there are 20 poeple at the same grade as me... Shouldnt the selection pool be open to the other offices rather than just targeting us 4??
Personally I dont mind making this awkward for the company, as i woudl much rather be a Rat from a sinking ship than be forced to walk the plank. I want to follow my own agenda..
I have been through this. Perhaps you can learn something that I wished I had known.
- If you're seeing the signs, believe them, and act yesterday.
- Don't spend your time scheming. - They probably won't tell you explicitly until the very end. I personally think this is worse, because it encourages one to scheme. The schemes will only make things worse.
- If you see the signs, assume that it happened yesterday, and forget the company. - Keep going in, all the time it is necessary. Don't worry about working. Take long lunches, and use your time to organise your future.
- Talk to the management. - Try to find out why they chose you. You probably won't be successful. Pester. If you can get a director to lose control at you, you've scored a point. Don't lose control yourself. Remember that they may not even have a reason for choosing you.
- If they're good, they'll be understanding, and you should be able to witness the true guilt, which your emotional condition deserves to see now. It will carry you through the future should you not succeed in finding work. By all means let them think you have no hope of finding alternative work.
- Don't be unpleasant or angry.
- Leave on amicable terms. - Don't even think about saying or doing anything that will compromise this. If you find that you cannot get future work, this will haunt you.
- Get out of your contract at the soonest possible opportunity, with the greatest stack of cash you can.
Edited by dilbert on Tuesday 3rd November 18:37
Edited by dilbert on Tuesday 3rd November 18:43
I have already applied for jobs elsewhere to cover my back... But i want more time to ararnge for a workpermit for the states or Canada...
Overall, i am using the time to do what i need to do, and doing the minimum required until a decision is made... We are all putting up a united front on this as we all have a good workload for the next 6 months but another office has 2 people twiddling there thumbs with nothing to do...
Oh well i only have to wait until the 9th for confiramtion of there decision..
Overall, i am using the time to do what i need to do, and doing the minimum required until a decision is made... We are all putting up a united front on this as we all have a good workload for the next 6 months but another office has 2 people twiddling there thumbs with nothing to do...
Oh well i only have to wait until the 9th for confiramtion of there decision..
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff