Redundancy question
Discussion
Anyone know the answer to this one?
Two employees, two jobs, same role, one full time & one part time (3 days a week).
Company wants to reduce to having one full time person in this role
Do they put both roles at risk & ask both employees to apply for the new role or is it the case that the full time role is not being made redundant & therefore that its the part-timer that goes by default?
i.e. is the fact that one role is full time & the other part time enough of a differentiator between the two jobs to select the part timer automatically or do they have to be treated together because the roles & responsibilities are basically the same?
Two employees, two jobs, same role, one full time & one part time (3 days a week).
Company wants to reduce to having one full time person in this role
Do they put both roles at risk & ask both employees to apply for the new role or is it the case that the full time role is not being made redundant & therefore that its the part-timer that goes by default?
i.e. is the fact that one role is full time & the other part time enough of a differentiator between the two jobs to select the part timer automatically or do they have to be treated together because the roles & responsibilities are basically the same?
Gargamel said:
Wombat3 said:
OTOH , as far as the full time person is concerned their role still exists after the process - so why should they even be put at risk?
The full time role is basically not being made redundant.....
The part time person could in theory elect to change their hours and apply for the full time role, rather than lose their job. The full time role is basically not being made redundant.....
AdditonLly you wouldn't say at the start of the process which role will remain, otherwise the consultation process is a waste of time.
You can do the whole thing quickly to minimise disruption.
Is there an Alternative role the part time person might do?
Jasandjules said:
You may also wish to consider why the part time worker is part time i.e. childcare or disability....
Indeed, but whatever the reason, why is it that the full timer gets dragged into this at all when its basically the part time role that is being removed ? Or is it the case that whether the roles are full or part time doesn't matter in this context & if the duties/responsibilities are basically the same they have to be considered together?
Does the full time person not have the right to argue that her position is basically not being made redundant and that therefore this process has nothing to do with her in the first place?
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff