Secondment becomes permanent becomes redundant...
Discussion
Has anyone got any advice or knowledge in the following area (I'll try to keep it brief!):
My girlfriend has worked for a company for just under 6 years.
Early 2008 she took a secondment into the "Communications Team" as a "Communications Assistance", initially part time then full time (still on secondment though).
The role was then made her permanent role in November 2009, with a job title of "PA to the Marketing Director".
Since then there has been a reshuffle. The Marketing Director she was working with has moved from the Communications Team into another area and is now "Development and Marketing Director" and has little to do with my girlfriend's department.
They are looking to replace the old "Marketing Director" role with a "Communications Director".
So, currently, there is no role of "Marketing Director" for her to be PA to.
It is not yet known whether the new role of "Communications Director" will require a PA (not all Directors have a PA in this company).
She has now been told that there will be a number of redundancies in her department, and has a meeting this wednesday to confirm which roles are at risk.
So, our questions are:
If her role is indeed made redundant, is there anything that says she should never have been made permanent into a role that was going? Her old role she moved out of 2 years ago is still there, and she was promised this permanent role for nearly 2 years before finally getting it.
I assume it's not implied that she would follow her old manager into their new department (as she's PA to a role, not a person)?
Is it important that her job title is now PA to a role that doesn't exist? Is there an implied change of job title here?
Are there any grounds for redress in any of this, or could she just unfortunately have been made permanent into a role that was then made redundant?
Any other thoughts or advice? She has a meeting about this on Wednesday, so we want to be armed with as much info as possible.
Many thanks in advance.
My girlfriend has worked for a company for just under 6 years.
Early 2008 she took a secondment into the "Communications Team" as a "Communications Assistance", initially part time then full time (still on secondment though).
The role was then made her permanent role in November 2009, with a job title of "PA to the Marketing Director".
Since then there has been a reshuffle. The Marketing Director she was working with has moved from the Communications Team into another area and is now "Development and Marketing Director" and has little to do with my girlfriend's department.
They are looking to replace the old "Marketing Director" role with a "Communications Director".
So, currently, there is no role of "Marketing Director" for her to be PA to.
It is not yet known whether the new role of "Communications Director" will require a PA (not all Directors have a PA in this company).
She has now been told that there will be a number of redundancies in her department, and has a meeting this wednesday to confirm which roles are at risk.
So, our questions are:
If her role is indeed made redundant, is there anything that says she should never have been made permanent into a role that was going? Her old role she moved out of 2 years ago is still there, and she was promised this permanent role for nearly 2 years before finally getting it.
I assume it's not implied that she would follow her old manager into their new department (as she's PA to a role, not a person)?
Is it important that her job title is now PA to a role that doesn't exist? Is there an implied change of job title here?
Are there any grounds for redress in any of this, or could she just unfortunately have been made permanent into a role that was then made redundant?
Any other thoughts or advice? She has a meeting about this on Wednesday, so we want to be armed with as much info as possible.
Many thanks in advance.
Edited by wiggy001 on Monday 15th February 16:39
early last year i was kinda in the same boat, i had lined up a promotion and move to another site for the same company. We had recruited a replacement for me who i had trained over 6 months. The downturn hit and all promotions and moves were cancelled which left me a sitting duck. They then wanted to make staff reductions, and even though my job was the obvious target i was considered for redundancy in the same "pool" as the guy we had hired to replace me, we were both offered voluntary redundancy with 1 job of the 2 to go, and the other guy took it.
Firstly, remember roles become redundant, not people. If the role is no longer required, sadly the fact that it was originally a secondment (it isn't any more) is not a factor. It has nothing to do with the business requirements of the company. Unless she can demonstrate that they intentionally changed her role knowing that the role was to become redundant, this would be all above board. However, the company would have a responsibility to find suitable employment for her within the company. So for example, if either the guy she was previously working for or the new director needed a PA, they couldn't get rid of her and hire someone else (unless the requirements were materially different). If however there are going to be fewer PA roles overall, one of the PAs roles may be made redundant. There will be a formal process to decide which. Her job title probably wouldn't matter per se, but if all the other PAs' situations haven't changed, it would make sense to choose her.
You may be jumping the gun though, maybe best to see what happens in the meeting?
You may be jumping the gun though, maybe best to see what happens in the meeting?
bogwoppit said:
Firstly, remember roles become redundant, not people. If the role is no longer required, sadly the fact that it was originally a secondment (it isn't any more) is not a factor. It has nothing to do with the business requirements of the company. Unless she can demonstrate that they intentionally changed her role knowing that the role was to become redundant, this would be all above board. However, the company would have a responsibility to find suitable employment for her within the company. So for example, if either the guy she was previously working for or the new director needed a PA, they couldn't get rid of her and hire someone else (unless the requirements were materially different). If however there are going to be fewer PA roles overall, one of the PAs roles may be made redundant. There will be a formal process to decide which. Her job title probably wouldn't matter per se, but if all the other PAs' situations haven't changed, it would make sense to choose her.
You may be jumping the gun though, maybe best to see what happens in the meeting?
Many thanks for the reply and pretty much as I've been thinking to be honest, just wanted to make sure there was nothing obvious (or not) that we're missing.You may be jumping the gun though, maybe best to see what happens in the meeting?
As you say, we may be jumping the gun totally and will see what tomorrow brings, but if there was anything we were missing I would rather know sooner rather than later.
Thanks again.
So it would appear that my girlfriend's role is at risk, and a 30 day consultation period has now started, with a personal consultation next week. The reason for her being at risk is that they are proposing to change her role from full time to part time. So, in light of this, I have a few questions:
1. I assume that this would be considered a redundancy in the normal way, and the fact that there will be a part-time PA role available is neither here nor there? Her role is going and a new role is being created?
2a. If she is offered another role, I believe she has the right to a trial period? Is this compulsory or at company discretion? If so, how long can/must this be for?
2b. Could she ask for a trial period in the Part Time PA role then turn it down and still get her redundancy? A bit cheeky but it would bring in 50% of her salary and allow her to look for work for a while so if it didn't risk her payout it might be worth it.
3a. Her old role is currently being filled by a temp, likely to be made a perm role again in April when the new budgets come in. Do they have any obligation to offer that role back to her (even if it doesn't become a perm role before the end of consultation)? Can she ask for the temp to be got rid of now?
3b. As before, could she do this for a trial period, even though it's her old role (so she knows what to expect)?
Many thanks in advance for any advice on this.
1. I assume that this would be considered a redundancy in the normal way, and the fact that there will be a part-time PA role available is neither here nor there? Her role is going and a new role is being created?
2a. If she is offered another role, I believe she has the right to a trial period? Is this compulsory or at company discretion? If so, how long can/must this be for?
2b. Could she ask for a trial period in the Part Time PA role then turn it down and still get her redundancy? A bit cheeky but it would bring in 50% of her salary and allow her to look for work for a while so if it didn't risk her payout it might be worth it.
3a. Her old role is currently being filled by a temp, likely to be made a perm role again in April when the new budgets come in. Do they have any obligation to offer that role back to her (even if it doesn't become a perm role before the end of consultation)? Can she ask for the temp to be got rid of now?
3b. As before, could she do this for a trial period, even though it's her old role (so she knows what to expect)?
Many thanks in advance for any advice on this.
They could ask her to accept a change to her working hours, but if she doesn't agree they would make the role redundant. They could probably just make her redundant from the start, but they would probably offer her the part time role anyway so it's six and half a dozen. She should still be entitled to redundancy pay if she turns it down because it's a major pay cut (i.e. it wouldn't be "unreasonable" to refuse).
I don't know a lot about trial periods, sorry. I know that if she is offered another role she has the right to a 4 week trial period, and if she notifies them within that time she still gets redundancy pay (statutory at least).
I doubt they are under any obligation to offer her old role back, temp or no temp. She could lay her cards on the table and ask them to get rid of the temp. There is nothing to be lost from asking, but it'd work best if she told them she is not going to accept a part time position so everyone knows the situation.
Whether she could go back to her old role on a trial period basis probably depends on how it is offered. I expect the role is not considered "available" (using a temp could be considered a business decision) so they don't have to offer it, so if they don't want to agree to a trial period they can just not offer her it at all. But, again, there's no harm in asking.
I would:
1. wait for the offer of the part time position
2. ask if they will get rid of the temp and offer her the old role on a trial period
3. if they say no, ask if they will get rid of the temp and offer her the old role without a trial period
I don't know a lot about trial periods, sorry. I know that if she is offered another role she has the right to a 4 week trial period, and if she notifies them within that time she still gets redundancy pay (statutory at least).
I doubt they are under any obligation to offer her old role back, temp or no temp. She could lay her cards on the table and ask them to get rid of the temp. There is nothing to be lost from asking, but it'd work best if she told them she is not going to accept a part time position so everyone knows the situation.
Whether she could go back to her old role on a trial period basis probably depends on how it is offered. I expect the role is not considered "available" (using a temp could be considered a business decision) so they don't have to offer it, so if they don't want to agree to a trial period they can just not offer her it at all. But, again, there's no harm in asking.
I would:
1. wait for the offer of the part time position
2. ask if they will get rid of the temp and offer her the old role on a trial period
3. if they say no, ask if they will get rid of the temp and offer her the old role without a trial period
Just as an update to this, it seems this was a case of HR looking at staff numbers, and not at what the staff actually do for 40 hours a week!
Long story short, her role (that they wanted to become 0.5 of a role) is now nearer 1.5 - 2 roles now they know what she does, and the needs of the 2 departments concerned. So they are currently drawing up a contract for her to stay, which should incorporate a small payrise too. She will also be doing this on a 3 month trial basis but doesn't expect there to be any issues.
So not all bad after all but thanks for the previous advice.
Long story short, her role (that they wanted to become 0.5 of a role) is now nearer 1.5 - 2 roles now they know what she does, and the needs of the 2 departments concerned. So they are currently drawing up a contract for her to stay, which should incorporate a small payrise too. She will also be doing this on a 3 month trial basis but doesn't expect there to be any issues.
So not all bad after all but thanks for the previous advice.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff