Please help. Redundant position. Currently 'no fit' for me

[StuVT]

I need advice from those that know.
I work for a large company and have done for 13 years. Working my way up to Regional Manager.
A week ago I was told the company is restructuring to branch based rather than regions. With a branch manager in each office, pretty much decided to be the current regional sales manager.
I was told that there is currently no fit for me as the plans are now. Once more is known of the new structure I will be told what I will be offered as a role.

I've been told the restructure is being done in phases and my staff must not know until official announcements go out as it doesn't directly affect them. I've been told I must continue my role with no change in behaviour for between 3 and 6 months until they can tell me what is on offer.

I have questions.

1. I have been working hard to get into management and have recently completed a uni course sponsored by the company. The role I will be offered will definately not be in management I have been told. Those roles are decided. So they have ended my career aspirations at the company. Can I ask they compensate me? (Silly question but seems so unfair)
Also relevant to this point is if I am placed/offered a lower paid position I keep the company car, lose the quarterly bonus and be put on a pay freeze until the cost of living increase for my new colleagues bring them in line with my earnings. Is this right?

2. If I don't accept one of the roles offered do they have to pay me redundancy?

3. If I take a role and it doesnt work out and I have to leave the company for another job, is that constructive dismissal?

I'm worried, the wifes worried as she's currently on maternity leave.

This has come out of the blue and I cant help but feel I'm being squeezed out and they are hoping I dont dare challenge them.

Thanks in advance

[mcg_]

Personally if I was you I would start to look for a new role now elsewhere. You’ve got some time then, perhaps it’ll be a good thing and you can progress into a better role at a new company?

You have my sympathy though, sounds like a st situation.

[rxe]

I only have very narrow experience of compromise agreements and the like, so no legal advice from me.

Practical advice: as far as they are concerned, you've taken it on the chin and are cracking on for the good of the company. Start looking for something else, now. You've got time.

Then you have choices:

- The company may offer you something really good, and you take it.

- The company may offer you something awful and you have a case against them .... and in an ideal world you'll take a decent settlement and then walk into that other job you have found.

[Pica-Pica]

Similar to the above, but..
What do you think is the future viability of the company and that sector?
Do you have sufficient other (transferable) skills to move to another sector?
Does your positions with regards to family/dependents mean you can take a risk and move?
Can you move to another area easily, or even abroad?

[JNW1]

I'm not an employment lawyer but it sounds to me like you're potentially in compromise agreement territory. Seems like your employer has just slotted people into jobs you were qualified to fill without any proper selection process and left you with a demotion as your only option; can't see that's legal personally but probably best you get proper legal advice.

As a start I suggest you try posting on the "Jobs and Employment Matters" section of the forum; there are some people on there with good, relevant, knowledge who I'm sure will be happy to help you out - good luck with it all!

[lyonspride]

No offence, but I think you've been a little naive and i think you've been there too long, they've dangled the carrot, you went for it and they know they can do whatever they like to you. After 20 years and several companies, I've learnt that hard work doesn't earn promotion, talking the talk, kissing the backsides and screwing over your colleagues (making them look worse than you) gets you promotions.

If you want to move on and up then you need to use the "2 year rule", join a company and get as high as you can, after 2 years you leave for somewhere else, rinse/repeat until your where you want to be. The reasoning here is that at some point people will try to hold you back, particularly managers that see you as a threat, character assassination will take place and your only choice is a new place with new faces that do not know you.

Some context.........
In my first job of 9 years, I was pushed out so that one of the managers could replace me with one of their friends, some years later I had a chat with the former HR manager at an ex-colleagues 50th birthday party and she was surprised to find I was working in the defence sector, she said "that surprises me with your record", I probed a bit and she told me she'd been told I had a criminal record for a rather serious crime, which she'd been told about by this bh of a manager who claimed to have got the information from her husband who works in the prison service. So there I was wasting 9 yrs of my early career going nowhere because the company thought I was a violent criminal and nobody thought to ask me or to actually run a check because when a manager speaks it is automatically the f**king truth.

Something similar happened with another role, but this time I was less naive, I got wind of it and started setting up voice recording devices to listen in and stay ahead of the "game" when away from my desk. It's absolutely shocking the things that so called "friends" and "colleagues" will do and say to put you down and take your place.

What i'm saying is, for as hard as it can be after all that time, start looking to move on, don't just sit in the corner and hope nothing bad happens, because when it does it will crush you.

[Gavia]

StuVT said:

I need advice from those that know.
I work for a large company and have done for 13 years. Working my way up to Regional Manager.
A week ago I was told the company is restructuring to branch based rather than regions. With a branch manager in each office, pretty much decided to be the current regional sales manager.
I was told that there is currently no fit for me as the plans are now. Once more is known of the new structure I will be told what I will be offered as a role.

I've been told the restructure is being done in phases and my staff must not know until official announcements go out as it doesn't directly affect them. I've been told I must continue my role with no change in behaviour for between 3 and 6 months until they can tell me what is on offer.

I have questions.

1. I have been working hard to get into management and have recently completed a uni course sponsored by the company. The role I will be offered will definately not be in management I have been told. Those roles are decided. So they have ended my career aspirations at the company. Can I ask they compensate me? (Silly question but seems so unfair)
Also relevant to this point is if I am placed/offered a lower paid position I keep the company car, lose the quarterly bonus and be put on a pay freeze until the cost of living increase for my new colleagues bring them in line with my earnings. Is this right?

2. If I don't accept one of the roles offered do they have to pay me redundancy?

3. If I take a role and it doesnt work out and I have to leave the company for another job, is that constructive dismissal?

I'm worried, the wifes worried as she's currently on maternity leave.

This has come out of the blue and I cant help but feel I'm being squeezed out and they are hoping I dont dare challenge them.

Thanks in advance

1. You can ask, but I doubt they will compensate you. Maybe see if you can get any repayment element of the course waived even if you leave. They haven’t ended you management aspirations, there’s nothing tomstop you applying for a management role down the line. If you accept a lower grade role, then they are perfectly entitled to do what they’re doing with your pay amd reward.

2. If you don’t accept a lower lid rolemthen yes they will have made you redeundant and will have to pay you redundancy. However, unless it’s stated as contractually better, you will receive one weeks pay for every complete year of service. That’s three months money, that will not last long.

3. No it's not constructive dismissal at all, unless there is more to it.

Now a bit of advice. You work for a large company it is unlikely that they will make simple errors (it’s possible, but highly unlikely), be wary of the pseudo lawyers on here, we’ve already got some discussion about compromise agreements which is well wide of the mark. If you were being compromised out, then they wouldn’t be restructuring, they’d simply sit you down, tell you it’s not working out they’d like you to leave. They’d offer a chunk of money and you’d sign a form and all the unpleasantness of sacking ypunwould be removed from both sides. This simply isn’t relevant here.

[craigjm]

Hang on a minute, compromise agreements are not wide of the mark in these situations.

Let’s go back a bit. The posters above are right when they say no to number three it’s not constructive dismissal.

If they offer you a role and you don’t take it then yes you will be made redundant. The terms of any payment will be set out in the paperwork you get but, depending on how old you are, will be a week for every year you’ve been there.

So.... three months salary. In these situations my advice would be to look for another job now and then if something good comes up go for it and abandon the redundancy. If it’s close to the redundancy payout then bide your time a bit and see if you can get the payout then move straight into a new role.

Now back to the start about compromise agreements. For a start they are not called that now they are settlement agreements and anyone who is in a redundancy situation that doesn’t ask their company to consider one is an idiot. There is no reason why they wouldn’t do it and basically it turns your redundancy pay into compensation so if the 13 weeks pay is less than 30k then you pay no tax. When in that situation my advice is always if you don’t ask you don’t get so I would ask for some money to be thrown in to help you access some training you want to do and ask for some money for outplacement support to help you find your next role. They may say no but if you don’t ask you don’t get.

Final bit of advice.... don’t stay with the company you will only end up becoming resentful and your performance will suffer and you might end up out and have no redundancy to count on.

Good luck

[parabolica]

^ you don’t need a settlement agreement to make the redundancy payments tax free; statutory redundancy payment + any company-discretionary redundancy pay is automatically tax free up to 30k.

Settlement Agreements are there to formally legalise a termination of employment which is beneficial to both parties, with an enhanced payment sometimes thrown in to make things go smoothly.

OP best advice to give is to seek formal legal advice from someone qualified in employment law. Companies will often cover (or part cover) the cost of this in redundancy situations so might be worth asking your HR dept what the story is there. Then find someone to guide you through your options.

[Gavia]

Why would a company need to agree a compromise / settlement agreement? Making the OP redundant is totally legal and no need for them to increase whatever statutory or contractual terms there are for redundancy.

[bladebloke]

Gavia said:

Why would a company need to agree a compromise / settlement agreement? Making the OP redundant is totally legal and no need for them to increase whatever statutory or contractual terms there are for redundancy.

Settlement agreements are very common in redundancy situations (even genuine ones). The employer offers a better package that statutory in return for the certaintainty of knowing that they’re not going to have to incur unrecoverable fees defending in the employment tribunal/settling the claim later anyway.

[bladebloke]

StuVT said:

I need advice from those that know.
I work for a large company and have done for 13 years. Working my way up to Regional Manager.
A week ago I was told the company is restructuring to branch based rather than regions. With a branch manager in each office, pretty much decided to be the current regional sales manager.
I was told that there is currently no fit for me as the plans are now. Once more is known of the new structure I will be told what I will be offered as a role.

I've been told the restructure is being done in phases and my staff must not know until official announcements go out as it doesn't directly affect them. I've been told I must continue my role with no change in behaviour for between 3 and 6 months until they can tell me what is on offer.

I have questions.

1. I have been working hard to get into management and have recently completed a uni course sponsored by the company. The role I will be offered will definately not be in management I have been told. Those roles are decided. So they have ended my career aspirations at the company. Can I ask they compensate me? (Silly question but seems so unfair)
Also relevant to this point is if I am placed/offered a lower paid position I keep the company car, lose the quarterly bonus and be put on a pay freeze until the cost of living increase for my new colleagues bring them in line with my earnings. Is this right?

2. If I don't accept one of the roles offered do they have to pay me redundancy?

3. If I take a role and it doesnt work out and I have to leave the company for another job, is that constructive dismissal?

I'm worried, the wifes worried as she's currently on maternity leave.

This has come out of the blue and I cant help but feel I'm being squeezed out and they are hoping I dont dare challenge them.

Thanks in advance

The devil will be in the detail, but it is quite possible that your role will become redundant (within the meaning set out in the Employment Rights Act 96) and if so, your employer would be able to dismiss you fairly for that reason.

As part of the redundancy process, they have to consider if they have a ‘suitable’ alternative role for you. What constitutes suitable/unsuitable alternative work is open for debate but a role on a lower salary, or even a lower position but keeping the same salary, would not usually be ‘suitable’.

If you are offered a suitable alternative and unreasonably refuse it, you forfeit your right to the statutory redundancy payment. The reasonableness of your conduct in refusing is considered subjectively - I.e. your particular personal circumstances are relevant (eg if you refuse a suitable role that’s based somewhere else, if the reason is that you have kids settled in a school and don’t want to move them, that is relevant).

If they do offer an alternate role and you take it, there is a statutory trial period. About 4 weeks IIRC. If you leave during that time you still get the statutory redundancy payment.

To answer the specifics:

1. Yes, the CAN compensate you, if you can get them to agree to it. Whether they’ll agree to it is an very different question. If you were to claim against them for unfair dismissal then you’re not likely to get much for the end of your career aspirations as such, but if you can’t get an equivalently paid job elsewhere, the loss of earnings would be very relevant.

2. See second/third para above

3. Probably not if you agreed to the new job. If you must take the new job for one reason or another, make it clear you’re taking it under protest.

Best advice has already been given by other posters above. Get yourself signed up with some recruitment agents and find yourself another job before any of this becomes relevant.

[bladebloke]

parabolica said:

^ you don’t need a settlement agreement to make the redundancy payments tax free; statutory redundancy payment + any company-discretionary redundancy pay is automatically tax free up to 30k.

Settlement Agreements are there to formally legalise a termination of employment which is beneficial to both parties, with an enhanced payment sometimes thrown in to make things go smoothly.

OP best advice to give is to seek formal legal advice from someone qualified in employment law. Companies will often cover (or part cover) the cost of this in redundancy situations so might be worth asking your HR dept what the story is there. Then find someone to guide you through your options.

This.

Except on thing perhaps - the only time employers will generally offer to pay for the employee’s advice is if a settlement agreement is offered. They pay for the advice the employee has to receive to make that agreement a successful waiver of employment claims. It doesn’t sound like one has been offered, yet.

[DSLiverpool]

Can I say that the reason the OPs area is last to change is they are hoping he jumps ship (probably the longest serving manager to be converted and considered the biggest “hassle” risk)

If they valued you then you would be looked after, but it appears not so get looking for another job and screw as much cash from them as you can.

[xyyman]

To the OP I would look upon this as an opportunity.

My situation was similar and I was one of two UK regional managers where the roles were made redundant. We were offered quite a good redundancy package or the option of a lesser role. My colleague took the money and embarked on a job search. I took the lesser role on the basis that my salary and benefits remained the same, albeit frozen, which gave me the security of paying mortgage, bills with no stress.

I also embarked on a job search but without the stress of needing any old job quickly. I was eventually offered a better role than I originally had with a competitor and I've never looked back. It revitalised my career which, to be honest, had become somewhat stale.

It sounds like the company are being up front with you and stating their intentions, I was just called into a meeting on the spot and told. So OP has the ability to, potentially, line up another job and, if the timings right, collect a redundancy package as well, sounds good to me.

[alistair1234]

Like the above, look at this as an opportunity.

Start looking for another job now, take the redundancy which will be a minimum of 13 weeks tax free income which is is probably more like 16/17 weeks net income, however they could well enhance it to a month per year instead of a week so you would get 13 months wages, first £30k tax free.

I've taken voluntary redundancy once and been made redundant another time and both were enhanced to a month per year's service instead of a week.

Then hopefully you'll start a new job soon and your safety net will be sat in the bank which you can then spend once you feel safe in the new place.

[StuVT]

Thank you all very much for taking the time to write such comprehensive replies.

A lot to consider but I feel easier on how to come up with a plan.

Thanks again

[7795]

DSLiverpool said:

Can I say that the reason the OPs area is last to change is they are hoping he jumps ship (probably the longest serving manager to be converted and considered the biggest “hassle” risk)

If they valued you then you would be looked after, but it appears not so get looking for another job and screw as much cash from them as you can.

Exactly how I read it.

It seems on what is currently known, your relative position in the company is no more. Big position change coming and they hope you will leave before they have to, possibly, make you redundant. You have been given 3-6 months to come to the conclusion with thinking time, that that is your best offer.

Once people realise that a company will (nearly) always look at the bottom line first, it is an easy conclusion to arrive at.

[JNW1]

Gavia said:

Now a bit of advice. You work for a large company it is unlikely that they will make simple errors (it’s possible, but highly unlikely), be wary of the pseudo lawyers on here, we’ve already got some discussion about compromise agreements which is well wide of the mark. If you were being compromised out, then they wouldn’t be restructuring, they’d simply sit you down, tell you it’s not working out they’d like you to leave. They’d offer a chunk of money and you’d sign a form and all the unpleasantness of sacking ypunwould be removed from both sides. This simply isn’t relevant here.

Why are you so confident this can't be a compromise situation?

The OP's first post suggested management positions in the new structure had been filled but there was no mention of any formal selection process and, although potentially qualified for one of the roles, it doesn't sound like he was given any opportunity to apply, be interviewed, etc. Now a company is perfectly entitled to adopt that approach in the sense they might know who they want in the various positions and don't want to go through what would be a charade of a selection process. However, if for expediency they choose to do it that way the people they've decided to overlook (possibly the OP in this example?) could well be in a compromise situation IMO.

For that reason my advice was for him to talk to an employment lawyer to get more of an informed opinion; most will offer a free initial consultation and it could be an hour well spent in my view.

I can also tell you from personal experience that large organisations can and do get it wrong when they're doing restructures. For example, at my last company a person "managing" a restructure was stupid enough to save-off a revised structure chart on a shared drive before the interview process was even complete; a giveaway that the outcome of the "selection" process was pre-determined and compromise settlements for unsuccessful candidates were the inevitable result.

I do agree with your comment on needing to be wary of pseudo-lawyers but from what I see you're actually one of the people who's trying to tell the OP what is or isn't relevant - what are your qualifications for doing so?

[Gavia]

JNW1 said:

Why are you so confident this can't be a compromise situation?

The OP's first post suggested management positions in the new structure had been filled but there was no mention of any formal selection process and, although potentially qualified for one of the roles, it doesn't sound like he was given any opportunity to apply, be interviewed, etc. Now a company is perfectly entitled to adopt that approach in the sense they might know who they want in the various positions and don't want to go through what would be a charade of a selection process. However, if for expediency they choose to do it that way the people they've decided to overlook (possibly the OP in this example?) could well be in a compromise situation IMO.

For that reason my advice was for him to talk to an employment lawyer to get more of an informed opinion; most will offer a free initial consultation and it could be an hour well spent in my view.

I can also tell you from personal experience that large organisations can and do get it wrong when they're doing restructures. For example, at my last company a person "managing" a restructure was stupid enough to save-off a revised structure chart on a shared drive before the interview process was even complete; a giveaway that the outcome of the "selection" process was pre-determined and compromise settlements for unsuccessful candidates were the inevitable result.

I do agree with your comment on needing to be wary of pseudo-lawyers but from what I see you're actually one of the people who's trying to tell the OP what is or isn't relevant - what are your qualifications for doing so?

Why are people so confident it is a compromise situation? Everyone on here immediately jumps to the extreme scenario and often gives the OP false hope. Look at some of the other conspiratorial claptrap posted around him being the longest serving manager, so they’re shafting him etc.

I’m trying to provide balance.

In any event the employer may have done a desktop selection, which is totally legal. Again, we only have the OP’s timeline for this, which may well be muddled.

I said it’s “unlikely” that they’ve got it wrong “possible, but unlikely”. I did not say it never happens.

I don’t have formal qualifications, ive been both sides of the table on this and reorganised a couple of the largest companies in their industry in the past. I also know how things work amd whilst I’d advise the OP to take legal advice, he needs to be wary. Word tends to get around an industry and many roles are filled by ex-colleagues at other companies. For example, out of my former team of 8, which is now spread across the industry, four are either COO, or MD of one time competitors.

He should get legal advice and whatever that advice is should trump absolutely everything he reads on here.